LIBRARY 

OF  THE 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA. 


Class 


SLAVERY  AND 
FOUR  YEARS  OF  WAR 

A  POLITICAL  HISTORY  OF  SLAVERY 
IN  THE  UNITED  STATES 

TOGETHER    WITH    A    NARRATIVE    OF    THE    CAMPAIGNS 

AND    BATTLES    OF    THE    CIVIL    WAR    IN    WHICH 

THE    AUTHOR    TOOK    PART:     1861-1865 


BY 

JOSEPH   WARREN   KEIFER 

BREVET    MAJOR-GENERAL   OF   VOLUNTEERS  ;    EX-SPFAItER   OF   THE    HOUSE    OF 
REPRESENTATIVES,   L.  S.  A.  ;    AND    MA  jC  K-GENERAL    OF 
' SPANISH    WAR 


ILLUSTRATED 


VOLUME  I. 


1861-1863 


G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons 
New  York  and  London 
TRmcfeerbocfeer  press 

1900 


COPYRIGHT,  1900 

BY 

JOSEPH  WARREN  KEIFER 


Ube  •tenidfeerbocfeer  press,  flew 


TO    THE 

MEMORY    OF    THE    DEAD  AND  AS  A   TRIBUTE  OF   ESTEEM   TO 

THE   LIVING    OFFICERS    AND    SOLDIERS    WHO    SERVED 

IMMEDIATELY  WITH  AND    UNDER  THE    AUTHOR 

IN     BATTLES    AND    CAMPAIGNS    OF    THE 

GREAT     AMERICAN     REBELLION 

THIS  BOOK  is  DEDICATED 


PREFACE 

THE  writer  of  this  book  was  a  volunteer  officer  in  the  Union 
army  throughout  the  war  of  the  Great  Rebellion,  and 
his  service  was  in  the  field. 

The  book,  having  been  written  while  the  author  was  engaged 
in  a  somewhat  active  professional  life,  lacks  that  literary  finish 
which  results  from  much  pruning  and  painstaking.  He,  how 
ever,  offers  no  excuse  for  writing  it,  nor  for  its  composition ; 
he  has  presumed  to  nothing  but  the  privilege  of  telling  his  own 
story  in  his  own  way.  He  has  been  at  no  time  forgetful  of 
the  fact  that  he  was  a  subordinate  in  a  great  conflict,  and  that 
other  soldiers  discharged  their  duties  as  faithfully  as  himself; 
and  while  no  special  favors  are  asked,  he  nevertheless  hopes 
that  what  he  has  written  may  be  accepted  as  the  testimony  of 
one  who  entertains  a  justifiable  pride  in  having  been  connected 
with  large  armies  and  a  participant  in  important  campaigns  and 
great  battles. 

He  flatters  himself  that  his  summary  of  the  political  history 
of  slavery  in  the  United  States,  and  of  the  important  political 
events  occurring  upon  the  firing  on  Fort  Sumter,  and  the  ac 
count  he  has  given  of  the  several  attempts  to  negotiate  a  peace 
before  the  final  overthrow  of  the  Confederate  armies,  will  be 
of  special  interest  to  students  of  American  history. 

Slavery  bred  the  doctrine  of  State-rights,  which  led,  inevita 
bly,  to  secession  and  rebellion.  The  story  of  slavery  and  its 
abolition  in  the  United  States  is  the  most  tragic  one  in  the 
world's  annals.  The  "  Confederate  States  of  America  "  is  the 
only  government  ever  attempted  to  be  formed,  avowedly  to 


vi  Preface 

perpetuate  human  slavery.  A  history  of  the  Rebellion  without 
that  of  slavery  is  but  a  recital  of  brave  deeds  without  reference 
to  the  motive  which  prompted  their  performance. 

The  chapter  on  slavery  narrates  its  history  in  the  United 
States  from  the  earliest  times;  its  status  prior  to  the  war;  its 
effect  on  political  parties  and  statesmen ;  its  aggressions,  and 
attempts  at  universal  domination  if  not  extension  over  the 
whole  Republic  ;  its  inexorable  demands  on  the  friends  of  free 
dom,  and  its  plan  of  perpetually  establishing  itself  through 
secession  and  the  formation  of  a  slave  nation.  It  includes  a 
history  of  the  secession  of  eleven  Southern  States,  and  the 
formation  of  "  The  Confederate  States  of  America";  also 
what  the  North  did  to  try  to  avert  the  Rebellion.  It  was 
written  to  show  why  and  how  the  Civil  War  came,  what  the 
conquered  lost,  and  what  the  victors  won. 

In  other  chapters  the  author  has  taken  the  liberty,  for  the 
sake  of  continuity,  of  going  beyond  the  conventional  limits  of 
a  personal  memoir,  but  in  doing  this  he  has  touched  on  no 
topic  not  connected  with  the  war. 

The  war  campaigns  cover  the  first  one  in  Western  Virginia, 
1861;  others  in  Kentucky,  Tennessee,  Mississippi,  and  Ala 
bama,  1862;  in  West  Virginia,  Virginia,  Maryland,  and  Penn 
sylvania,  1863;  and  in  Virginia,  1864;  ending  with  the  capture 
of  Richmond  and  Petersburg,  the  battles  of  Five  Forks  and 
Sailor's  Creek,  and  the  surrender  of  Lee  to  Grant  at  Appomat- 
tox,  1865.  A  chapter  on  the  New  York  riots  in  1863,  also  one 
on  the  "  Peace  Negotiations,"  will  be  found,  each  in  its  proper 
place. 

Personal  mention  and  descriptions  of  many  officers  known 
to  the  writer  are  given ;  also  war  incidents  deemed  to  be  of 
interest  to  the  reader. 

But  few  generalizations  are  indulged  in  either  as  to  events, 
principles,  or  the  character  of  men;  instead,  facts  are  given 
from  which  generalizations  may  be  formed. 

The  author  is  indebted  to  his  friend,  General  George  D. 
Ruggles  (General  Meade's  Assistant  Adjutant-General,  Army 
of  the  Potomac,  late  Adjutant-General,  U.S.A.),  for  important 


Preface 


Vll 


data  furnished  from  the  War  Department,  and  to  his  particular 
friends,  both  in  peace  and  war,  General  John  Beatty  and 
Colonel  Wm.  S.  Furay  of  Columbus,  Ohio,  for  valuable  sug 
gestions. 

J.   W.   K. 
DECEMBER,  1899. 


ILLUSTRATIONS 


j.   WARREN  KEIFER Frontispiece 

ANDREW  H.   REEDER,    FIRST    GOVERNOR   OF  KANSAS  TERRITORY. 

FLIGHT    IN    DISGUISE,     1855 94 

[From  a  painting  in  Coates'  House,  Kansas  City,  Missouri.] 
ABRAHAM    LINCOLN  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  I2O 

MAP    OF    THE    UNITED    STATES,     1860 124 

[Showing  free  and  slave  States  and  Territories.] 
GENERAL    ULYSSES    S.    GRANT,    U.S.A.  .  .  .  .       158 

[From  a  photograph  taken  1865.] 

CONFEDERATE    SILVER    HALF-DOLLAR  .....        l6o 

JOHN    BEATTY,    BRIGADIER-GENERAL    OF    VOLUNTEERS        .  .        188 

[From  a  photograph  taken  1863.] 

RICH   MOUNTAIN   AND    CHEAT   MOUNTAIN   COUNTRY,    W.    VA.       .       214 
GENERAL    WILLIAM    T.    SHERMAN,    U.S.A.  ....       232 

[From  a  photograph  taken  iSSi.] 
MAJOR-GENERAL    O.    M.    MITCHEL       ......       264 

[From  a  photograph  taken  1862.] 
BREVET    BRIGADIER-GENERAL    WM.     H.     BALL      ....        308 

[From  a  photograph  taken  1864.] 

REV.   WILLIAM  T.  MELOY,   D.D.,    LIEUTENANT    I22D  OHIO  VOLUN 
TEERS        .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .312 

[From  a  photograph  taken  1896.] 
MAJOR-GENERAL    ROBERT    H.    MILROY          .....       316 

[From  a  photograph  taken  1863.] 


Xll 


Illustrations 


LIEUTENANT    JAMES    A.    FOX,     IIOTH    OHIO    VOLUNTEERS 

[From  a  photograph  taken  1863.] 
MAP    OF    SHENANDOAH    VALLEY  ...... 

[From  Major  W.  F.  Tiemann's  History  of  the  Jjgth  New  York.~\ 
REV.   MILTON  J.   MILLER,  CHAPLAIN   IIOTH  OHIO  VOLUNTEERS     . 

[From  a  photograph  taken  1865.] 

REV.  CHARLES    C.    McCABE,   D.D.,   BISHOP    M.    E.    CHURCH,    CHAP 
LAIN    I22D    OHIO    VOLUNTEERS 

[From  a  photograph  taken  1868.] 


PAGE 

316 


322 


322 


SLAVERY  AND  FOUR  YEARS  OF  WAR 


SLAVERY  AND  FOUR  YEARS 
OF  WAR 


CHAPTER  I 
SLAVERY:    ITS   POLITICAL   HISTORY   IN   THE   UNITED    STATES 

(I.)  Introductory — (II.)  Introduction  of  Slavery  into  the  Colonies — (III.)  Declara 
tion  of  Independence — (IV.)  Continental  Congress  :  Articles  of  Confederation 
—(V.)  Ordinance  of  1787— (VI.)  Constitution  of  the  United  States— (VII.) 
• — -Causes  of  Growth  of  Slavery — (VIII.)  Fugitive-Slave  Law,  1793 — (IX.)  Slave 
Trade  Abolished — (X.)  Louisiana  Purchase — (XI.)  Florida — (XII.)  Missouri 
Compromise— (XIII.)  Nullification— (XIV.)  Texas— (XV.)  Mexican  War, 
Acquisition  of  California  and  New  Mexico — (XVI.)  Compromise  Measures, 
1850— (XVII.)  Nebraska  Act— (XVIII.)  Kansas  Struggle  for  Freedom— (XIX.) 
Dred  Scott  Case— (XX.)  John  Brown  Raid — (XXI.)  Presidential  Elections, 
1856-1860— (XXII.)  Dissolution  of  the  Union— (XXIII.)  Secession  of  States 
— (XXIV.)  Action  of  Religious  Denominations — (XXV.)  Proposed  Conces 
sions  to  Slavery— (XXVI.)  Peace  Conference— (XXVII.)  District  of  Columbia 
—(XXVIII.)  Slavery  Prohibited  in  Territories— (XXIX.)  Benton's  Sum- 
mary — (XXX.)  Prophecy  as  to  Slavery  and  Disunion. 


INTRODUCTORY 

LAVERY  is  older  than  tradition — older  than  authentic 
history,  and  doubtless  antedates  any  organized  form  of 
human  government.      It  had  its  origin  in  barbaric  times. 
Uncivilized  man  never  voluntarily  performed  labor  even  for 
his  own  comfort ;  he  only  struggled  to  gain  a  bare  subsistence. 
He  did  not  till  the  soil,  but  killed  wild  animals  for  food  and 


VOL.  I. — I. 


2  Political  History  of  Slavery 

to  secure  a  scant  covering  for  his  body ;  and  cannibalism  was 
common.  Tribes  were  formed  for  defence,  and  thus  wars 
came,  all,  however,  to  maintain  mere  savage  existence. 
Through  primitive  wars  captives  were  taken,  and  such  as  were 
not  slain  were  compelled  to  labor  for  their  captors.  In  time 
these  slaves  were  used  to  domesticate  useful  animals  and, 
later,  were  forced  to  cultivate  the  soil  and  build  rude  structures 
for  the  comfort  and  protection  of  their  masters.  Thus  it  was 
that  mankind  was  first  forced  to  toil  and  ultimately  came  to 
enjoy  labor  and  its  incident  fruits,  and  thus  human  slavery 
became  a  first  step  from  barbarism  towards  the  ultimate  civili 
zation  of  mankind. 

White  slavery  existed  in  the  English-American  colonies 
antecedent  to  black  or  African  slavery,  though  at  first  only 
intended  to  be  conditional  and  not  to  extend  to  offspring. 
English,  Scotch,  and  Irish  alike,  regardless  of  ancestry  or  re 
ligious  faith,  were,  for  political  offences,  sold  and  transported 
to  the  dependent  American  colonies.  They  wrere  such  persons 
as  had  participated  in  insurrections  against  the  Crown ;  many 
of  them  being  prisoners  taken  on  the  battle-field,  as  were  the 
Scots  taken  on  the  field  of  Dunbar,  the  royalist  prisoners  from 
the  field  of  Worcester ;  likewise  the  great  leaders  of  the  Pen- 
ruddoc  rebellion,  and  many  who  were  taken  in  the  insurrection 
of  Monmouth. 

Of  these,  many  were  first  sold  in  England  to  be  afterwards 
re-sold  on  shipboard  to  the  colonies,  as  men  sell  horses,  to  the 
highest  bidder. 

There  was  also,  in  some  of  the  colonies,  a  conditional  servi 
tude,  under  indentures,  for  servants,  debtors,  convicts,  and 
perhaps  others.  These  forms  of  slavery  made  the  introduction 
of  negro  and  perpetual  slavery  easy. 

Australasia  alone,  of  all  inhabited  parts  of  the  globe,  has  the 
honor,  so  far  as  history  records,  of  never  having  a  slave  popu 
lation. 

Egyptian  history  tells  us  of  human  bondage ;  the  patriarch 
Abraham,  the  founder  of  the  Hebrew  nation,  owned  and  dealt 
in  slaves.  That  the  law  delivered  to  Moses  from  Mt.  Sinai 


Introductory  3 

justified  and  tolerated  human  slavery  was  the  boast  of  modern 
slaveholders. 

Moses,  from  "  Nebo's  heights,"  saw  the  "  land  of  promise," 
where  flowed  "  milk  and  honey  "  in  abundance,  and  where 
slavery  existed.  The  Hebrew  people,  but  forty  years  them 
selves  out  of  bondage,  possessed  this  land  and  maintained 
slavery  therein. 

The  advocates  of  slavery  and  the  slave  trade  exultingly 
quoted : 

"  And  I  will  sell  your  sons  and  your  daughters  into  the  hands  of 
the  children  of  Judah,  and  they  shall  sell  them  to  the  Sabeans,  to  a 
people  far  off;  for  the  Lord  hath  spoken  it." — Joel  iii.,  8. 

They  likewise  claimed  that  St.  Paul,  while  he  preached  the 
gospel  to  slaveholders  and  slaves  alike  in  Rome,  yet  used  his 
calling  to  enable  him  to  return  to  slavery  an  escaped  human 
being — Onesimus. ' 

The  advocates  of  domestic  slavery  justified  it  as  of  scriptural 
and  divine  origin. 

From  the  Old  Testament  they  quoted  other  texts,  not  only 
to  justify  the  holding  of  slaves  in  perpetual  bondage,  but  the 
continuance  of  the  slave  trade  with  all  its  cruelties. 

"  And  he  said,  I  am  Abraham's  servant." — Gen.  xxiv.,  34. 

"  And  there  was  of  the  house  of  Saul  a  servant  whose  name  was 
Ziba.  And  when  they  had  called  him  unto  David,  the  King  said 
unto  him,  Art  thou  Ziba  ?  And  he  said,  Thy  servant  is  he.  ... 

'  Then  the  King  called  to  Ziba,  Saul's  servant,  and  said  unto  him, 
I  have  given  unto  thy  master's  son  all  that  pertained  to  Saul,  and 
to  all  his  house. 

'  Thou,  therefore,  and  thy  sons,  and  thy  servants  shall  till  the 
land  for  him,  and  thou  shalt  bring  in  the  fruits,  that  thy  master's 
son  may  have  food  to  eat,"  etc.  "Now  Ziba  had  fifteen  sons  and 
twenty  servants." — 2  Samuel  ix.,  2,  9-10. 

"  I  got  me  servants  and  maidens  and  had  servants  born  in  my 
house;  also  I  had  great  possessions  of  great  and  small  cattle  above 
all  that  were  in  Jerusalem  before  me." — Eccles.  ii.,  7. 

1  Epistle  to  Philemon. 


4  Political  History  of  Slavery 

"  And  he  said,  Hagar,  Sarai's  maid,  whence  comest  thou  ?  and 
she  said,  I  flee  from  the  face  of  my  mistress  Sarai. 

"  And  the  angel  of  the  Lord  said  unto  her,  Return  to  thy  mistress, 
and  submit  thyself  to  her  hands." — Gen.  xvi.,  8,  9. 

"  A  servant  will  not  be  corrected  by  words;  for  though  he  under 
stand,  he  will  not  answer." — Prov.  xxix.,  19. 

And  from  the  New  Testament  they  triumphantly  quoted : 

"  Let  every  man  abide  in  the  same  calling  wherein  he  was  called. 
Art  thou  called  being  a  servant  ?  care  not  for  it;  but  if  thou  mayest 
be  made  free,  use  it  rather." — i  Cor.  vii.,  20-22. 

"  Servants,  be  obedient  to  them  that  are  your  masters  according 
to  the  flesh,  with  fear  and  trembling,  in  singleness  of  your  heart, 
as  unto  Christ,"  etc. 

"  And,  ye  masters,  do  the  same  things  unto  them,  forbearing 
threatening:  knowing  that  your  Master  also  is  in  heaven;  neither 
is  there  respect  of  persons  with  him." — Eph.  vi.,  5-9. 

"  Servants,  obey  in  all  things  your  masters  according  to  the  flesh; 
not  with  eye  service,  as  men  pleasers;  but  in  singleness  of  heart, 
fearing  God." — Col.  iii.,  22. 

"  Masters,  give  unto  your  servants  that  which  is  just  and  equal: 
knowing  that  ye  also  have  a  Master  in  heaven." — Col.  iv.,  i. 

"  Let  as  many  servants  as  are  under  the  yoke  count  their  own 
masters  worthy  of  all  honor,  that  the  name  of  God  and  his  doctrines 
be  not  blasphemed,"  etc. — i  Tim.  vi.,  i,  2. 

"  Exhort  servants  to  be  obedient  unto  their  own  masters,  and  to 
please  them  well  in  all  things:  not  answering  again;  not  purloining, 
but  showing  all  good  fidelity;  that  they  may  adorn  the  doctrine  of 
God  our  Saviour  in  all  things." — Titus  ii.,  9,  10. 

"  Servants,  be  subject  to  your  masters  with  all  fear;  not  only  to 
the  good  and  gentle,  but  also  to  the  froward." — i  Pet.  ii.,  18. 

The  advocates  of  slavery  maintained  that  Christ  approved 
the  calling  as  a  slaveholder  as  well  as  the  faith  of  the  Roman 
centurion,  whose  servant,  "  sick  of  a  palsy,"  Christ  miracu 
lously  healed,  by  saying:  "  I  have  not  found  so  great  faith,  no, 
not  in  Israel. "•  —  Matt,  viii.,  10. 

They  also  cited  Dr.  Adam  Clark,  the  great  Bible  commenta 
tor;  Dr.  Neander's  work,  entitled  Planting  and  Training  the 


Introductory  5 

Church,  and  Dr.  Mosheim's  Church  History,  as  evidence  that 
the  Bible  not  only  sanctioned  slavery  but  authorized  its  per 
petuation  through  all  time.1  In  other  words,  pro-slavery 
advocates  in  effect  affirmed  that  these  great  writers: 

"  Torture  the  hallowed  pages  of  the  Bible, 
To  sanction  crime,  and  robbery,  and  blood, 
And,  in  oppression's  hateful  service,  libel 
Both  man  and  God." 

While  the  teachings  of  neither  the  Old  nor  the  New  Testa 
ment,  nor  of  the  Master,  were  to  overthrow  or  to  establish 
political  conditions  as  established  by  the  temporal  powers  of 
the  then  age,  yet  it  must  be  admitted  that  large  numbers  of 
people,  of  much  learning  and  a  high  civilization,  believed 
human  slavery  was  sanctioned  by  divine  authority. 

The  deductions  made  from  the  texts  quoted  were  unwar 
ranted.  The  principles  of  justice  and  mercy,  on  which  the 
Christian  religion  is  founded,  cannot  be  tortured  into  even  a 
toleration  (as,  possibly,  could  the  law  of  Moses)  of  the  existence 
of  the  unnatural  and  barbaric  institution  of  slavery,  or  the 
slave  trade. 

Slavery  was  wrong  perse  ;  wholly  unjustifiable  on  the  plainest 
principles  of  humanity  and  justice;  and  the  consciences  of  all 
unprejudiced,  enlightened,  civilized  people  led  them  in  time 
to  believe  that  it  had  no  warrant  from  God  and  ought  to  have 
no  warrant  from  man  to  exist  on  the  face  of  the  earth. 

The  friends  of  freedom  and  those  who  believed  slavery  sinful 
never  for  a  moment  assented  to  the  claim  that  it  was  sanctioned 
by  Holy  Writ,  or  that  it  was  justified  by  early  and  long-con 
tinued  existence  through  barbaric  or  semi-barbaric  times. 

1  The  references  to  the  Bible  are  taken  from  the  most  learned  advocates  of  the 
divinity  of  slavery,  in  its  last  years.  Ought  American  Slavery  to  be  Perpetuated? 
(Brownlow  and  Pryne  debate),  p.  78,  etc.  Slavery  Ordained  of  God  (Ross),  146, 
etc.,  176,  etc. 

Rev.  Frederick  A.  Ross,  D.D.  (the  author),  a  celebrated  Presbyterian  minister, 
was  arrested  in  1862  at  Huntsville,  Alabama,  while  it  was  occupied  by  the  Union 
forces,  for  praying  from  the  pulpit  for  the  success  of  secession. 

Parson  Brownlow  was  a  Union  man  in  1861,  was  much  persecuted  at  his  home 
in  Knoxville,  Tenn.,  later  advocated  emancipation. 


6  Political  History  of  Slavery 

They  denied  that  it  could  thus  even  be  sanctified  into  a 
moral  right ;  that  time  ever  converted  cruelty  into  a  blessing, 
or  a  wrong  into  a  right ;  that  any  human  law  could  give  it 
legal  existence,  or  rightfully  perpetuate  it  against  natural 
justice;  they  maintained  that  a  Higher  Law,  written  in  God's 
immutable  decrees  of  mercy,  was  paramount  to  all  human  law 
or  practice,  however  long  continuing;  that  the  lessons  taught 
by  Christ  in  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  and  in  all  his  life  and 
teachings  were  a  condemnation  of  it ;  and  that  an  enlightened, 
progressive  civilization  demanded  its  final  overthrow. 

In  America:  Slavery  is  dead.     We  return  to  its  history. 

Greece  had  her  slaves  before  tradition  blended  into  history, 
though,  four  centuries  before  Christ,  Alcidamas  proclaimed : 
"God  has  sent  forth  all  -men  free  :  nature  has  made  no  man  slave." 

Alexander,  the  mighty  Macedonian  (fourth  century  B.C.), 
sold  captives  taken  at  Tyre  and  Gaza,  the  most  accomplished 
people  of  that  time,  into  slavery.1 

Rome  had  her  slaves;  and  her  slave-marts  were  open  at  her 
principal  ports  for  traffic  in  men  and  women  of  all  nationalities, 
especially  Christians  and  captives  taken  in  war. 

The  German  nations  on  the  shores  of  the  Baltic  carried  on 
the  desolating  traffic.  Russia  recognized  slavery  and  carried 
on  a  slave  trade  through  her  merchantmen. 

The  Turks  forbade  the  enslaving  of  Mussulmans,  but  sold 
Christian  and  other  captives  into  slavery.  Christian  and  Moor, 
for  seven  hundred  years  in  the  doubtful  struggle  in  Western 
Europe,  respectively,  doomed  their  captives  to  slavery. 

Contemporary  with  the  discovery  of  America,  the  Moors 
were  driven  from  Granada,  their  last  stronghold  in  Spain,  to 
the  north  of  Africa;  there  they  became  corsairs,  privateers, 
and  holders  of  Christian  slaves.  Their  freebooter  life  and 
cruelty  furnished  the  pretext,  not  only  to  enslave  the  people 
of  the  Moorish  dominion,  but  of  all  Africa.  The  oldest 

1  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  more  than  fifteen  hundred  years  (twelfth  century) 
after  Alexander's  conquests,  Saladin,  the  great  Sultan,  and  other  Mohammedan 
rulers,  and  Richard  Coeur  de  Leon  and  other  crusade  leaders  in  Syria,  respec 
tively,  doomed  their  captives  to  slavery,  regardless  of  nationality  or  color. — Saladin 
(Heroes  of  Nations,  Putnams),  229-232,  338. 


Introductory  7 

accounts  of  Africa  bear  testimony  to  the  existence  of  domestic 
slavery — of  negro  enslaving  negro,  and  of  caravans  of  dealers 
in  negro  slaves. 

Columbus,  whose  glory  as  the  discoverer  of  this  continent 
we  proclaim,  on  a  return  voyage  (1494)  carried  five  hundred 
native  Americans  to  Spain,  a  present  to  Queen  Isabella,  and 
American  Indians  were  sold  into  foreign  bondage,  as  "  spoils 
of  war,"  for  two  centuries. 

The  Saxon  carried  slavery  in  its  most  odious  form  into  Eng 
land,  where,  at  one  time,  not  half  the  inhabitants  were  abso 
lutely  free,  and  where  the  price  of  a  man  was  but  four  times 
the  price  of  an  ox. 

He  sold  his  own  kindred  into  slavery.  English  slaves  were 
held  in  Ireland  till  the  reign  of  Henry  II. 

In  time,  however, -the  spirit  of  Christianity,  pleading  the 
cause  of  humanity,  stayed  slavery's  progress,  and  checked  the 
slave  traffic  by  appeals  to  conscience. 

Alexander  III.,  Pope  of  Rome  in  the  twelfth  century,  pro 
claimed  against  it,  by  writing:  " Nature  having  made  no  slaves, 
all  men  have  an  equal  right  to  liberty. 

Efficacious  as  the  Christian  religion  has  been  to  destroy  or 
mitigate  evil,  it  has  failed  to  render  the  so-called  Christian 
slaveholder  better  than  the  pagan,  or  to  improve  the  condition 
of  the  bondsmen. 

It  may  be  observed  that  when  slavery  seemed  to  be  firmly 
planted  in  the  Republic  of  the  United  States  of  America, 
Egypt,  as  one  of  the  powers  of  the  earth,  had  passed  away; 
her  slavery,  too,  was  gone — only  her  Pyramids,  Sphinx,  and 
Monoliths  have  been  spared  by  time  and  a  just  judgment. 
Greece,  too,  had  perished,  only  her  philosophy  and  letters 
survive;  Israel's  people,  though  the  chosen  of  God,  had,  as 
a  nation,  been  bodily  carried  into  oriental  Babylonian  captiv 
ity,  and  in  due  time  had,  in  fulfilment  of  divine  judgment, 
been  dispersed  through  all  lands.  God  in  his  mighty  wrath 
also  thundered  on  Babylon's  iniquity,  and  it,  too,  passed  away 
forever,  and  the  prophet  gives  as  a  reason  for  this,  that  Baby 
lon  dealt  in  "  slaves  and  t lie  souls  of  men  " 


8  Political  History  of  Slavery 

Rome,  once  the  mistress  of  the  world,  ceased  as  a  nation  to 
live ;  her  greatness  and  her  glory,  her  slave  markets  and  her 
slaves,  all  gone  together  and  forever. 

Germany,  France,  Spain,  and  other  slave  nations  renounced 
slavery  barely  in  time  to  escape  the  general  national  doom. 

Russia,  though  her  mighty  Czars  possessed  absolute  power 
to  rule,  trembled  before  the  mighty  insurrections  of  peasant- 
serfs  that  swept  over  the  bodies  of  slain  nobles  and  slave- 
masters  from  remote  regions  to  the  very  gates  of  Moscow. 
Catherine  II.,  Alexander  L,  Nicholas  L,  and  Alexander  II. 
listened  to  the  threatened  doom,  and,  to  save  the  empire,  put 
forth  decrees  to  loosen  and  finally  to  break  the  chains  of  twenty 
millions  of  slaves  and  serfs.  Even  Moorish  slavery  in  Northern 
Africa  in  large  part  passed  away.  Mohammedan,1  Brahmin, 
and  Buddhist  had  no  sanction  for  human  slavery. 

England  heard  the  warning  cry  just  in  time  to  save  the  king 
dom  from  the  impending  common  destiny  of  slave  nations. 

It  was  not,  however,  until  1772,  that  Lord  Mansfield,  from 
the  Court  of  the  King's  Bench  of  Great  Britain,  announced 
that  no  slave  could  be  held  under  the  English  Constitution. 
This  decision  was  of  binding  force  in  her  American  colonies 
when  the  Declaration  of  Independence  \vas  adopted,  and  the 

Liberty  Bell  "  proclaimed  "  Liberty  throughout  all  the  land 
to  all  the  inhabitants  thereof." 

The  argument  that  the  institution  of  slavery  was  sanctified 
by  age  ceased,  long  since,  to  be  satisfying  to  those  who  learned 
justice  and  mercy  in  the  light  of  Christian  love,  and  who  could 
read,  not  only  that  human  slavery  had  existed  from  the  earliest 
times,  but  that  it  had  existed  without  right,  only  by  the  power 
of  might,  not  sanctioned  by  reason  and  natural  justice,  and 
that  in  its  train  a  myriad  of  coincident  evils,  crimes,  and  im 
moralities  had  taken  birth  and  flourished,  blasting  both  master 
and  slave  and  the  land  they  inhabited,  and  that  God's  just  and 


1  Slavery  and  the  slave  trade,  in  spite  of  the  teachings  of  the  Koran,  grew  up  in 
Mohammedan  countries.  The  traffic  in  slaves,  however,  had  been  frequently 
proclaimed  against  by  the  Ottoman  Porte. 


Introductory  9 

retributive  judgment  has  universally  been  visited  on  all  nations 
and  peoples  continuing  to  maintain  and  perpetuate  it. 

Murder  has  existed  in  the  world  since  Cain  and  Abel  met  by 
the  altar  of  God,  yet  no  sane  person  for  that  reason  justifies  it. 
So  slavery  has  stalked  down  the  long  line  of  centuries,  cursing 
and  destroying  millions  with  its  damning  power,  but  time  has 
not  sanctified  it  into  a  right.  The  longer  it  existed  the  more 
foul  became  the  blot  upon  history's  pages,  and  the  deeper  the 
damnation  upon  humanity  it  wrought. 

When  all  the  civilized  nations  of  Europe,  as  well  as  the 
nations  and  even  tribes  of  Asia,  had  either  abolished  slavery 
or  taken  steps  to  effectually  do  so,  it  remained  for  the  United 
States  to  stand  alone  upholding  it  in  its  direst  form. 

The  nations  of  the  ancient  world  either  shook  off  slavery  in 
attempts  to  wash  away  its  bloody  stain,  or  slavery  wiped  them 
from  the  powers  of  the  earth.  So  of  the  more  modern  nations. 

Our  Republic,  boastful  of  its  free  institutions,  of  its  constitu 
tional  liberty,  its  free  schools  and  churches,  of  its  glories  in 
the  cause  of  humanity,  its  patriotism,  resplendent  history, 
inventive  genius,  wealth,  industry,  civilization,  and  Christian 
ity,  maintained  slavery  until  it  was  only  saved  from  the  com 
mon  doom  of  slave  nations  by  the  atoning  sacrifice  of  its  best 
blood  and  the  mercy  of  an  offended  God. 

More  than  two  centuries  (1562)  before  Lord  Mansfield  judi 
cially  announced  freedom  to  be  the  universal  law  of  England, 
Sir  John  Hawkins  acquired  the  infamous  distinction  of  being 
the  first  Englishman  to  embark  in  the  slave  trade,  and  the 
depravity  of  public  sentiment  in  England  then  approved  his 
action.  He  then  seized,  on  the  African  coast,  and  transported 
a  large  cargo  of  negroes  to  Hispaniola  and  bartered  them  for 
sugar,  ginger,  and  pearls,  at  great  profit.1  Here  commenced 
a  traffic  in  human  beings  by  English-speaking  people  (scarcely 
yet  ceased)  that  involved  murder,  arson,  theft,  and  all  the 

1  But  the  first  trace  of  negro  slavery  in  America  came  in  1502,  only  ten  years 
after  its  discovery,  through  a  decree  of  Ferdinand  and  Isabella  permitting  negro 
slaves  born  in  Spain,  descendants  of  natives  brought  from  Guinea,  to  be  trans 
ported  to  Hispaniola. — Life  of  Columbus,  by  Irving  (Putnams),  p.  275. 


io  Political  History  of  Slavery 

cruelty  and  crimes  incident  to  the  capture,  transportation,  and 
subjection  of  human  beings  to  the  lust,  avarice,  and  power  of 
man. 

Sir  John  Hawkins'  success  coming  to  the  notice  of  the 
avaricious  and  ambitious  Queen  Elizabeth,  she,  five  years  later 
(1567),  became  the  open  protector  of  a  new  expedition  and 
sharer  in  the  nefarious  traffic,  thus  becoiming  a  promoter, 
abettor,  and  participant  in  all  its  crimes. 

To  the  "  African  Company,"  for  a  long  period,  was  granted 
by  England  a  monopoly  of  the  slave  trade,  but  it  could  not  be 
confined  to  this  company.  In  1698,  England  exacted  a  tariff 
on  the  slave  cargoes  of  her  subjects  engaged  in  the  trade. 

From  1680  to  1700,  by  convention  with  Spain,  the  English, 
it  is  estimated,  stole  from  Africa  300,000  negroes  to  supply  the 
Spanish  West  Indies  with  slaves.  By  the  treaty  of  Utrecht 
(1713)  Spain  granted  to  England,  during  thirty  years,  the 
absolute  monopoly  of  supplying  slaves  to  the  Spanish  colonies. 
By  this  treaty  England  agreed  to  take  to  the  West  Indies  not 
less  than  144,000  negroes,  or  4800  each  year;  and,  to  guard 
against  scandal  to  the  Roman  Catholic  religion,  heretical  slave- 
traders  were  forbidden.  This  monopoly  was  granted  by 
England  to  the  "  South  Sea  Company." 

England  did  not  confine  her  trade  to  the  West  Indies.  In 
1750,  it  'was  shown  in  the  English  Parliament  that  46,000 
negroes  were  annually  sold  to  English  colonies.1 

As  early  as  1565,  Sir  John  Hawthorne  and  Menendez  im 
ported  negroes  as  slaves  into  Florida,  then  a  Spanish  posses 
sion,  and  with  Spain's  sanction  many  were  carried  into  the 
West  Indies  and  sold  into  slavery. 

II 

INTRODUCTION    OF    SLAVERY    INTO    THE    COLONIES 

In  August,  1619,  a  Dutch  man-of-war  sailed  up  the  James 
River  in  Virginia,  landed  and  sold  to  the  colony  at  Jamestown 
twenty  negroes  as  slaves.  This  event  marked  the  beginning  of 

1  History  for  Ready  Reference,  vol.  iv.,  p.  2923. 


Introduction  of  Slavery  into  the  Colonies     1 1 

1  negro  slavery  in  English-American  colonies.  Two  centuries 
and  a  half  did  not  suffice  to  put  an  end  to  Ethiopian  slavery 
and  the  evils  of  a  traffic  begun  on  so  small  a  scale. 

One  year  later  (1620)  the  Puritans  landed  at  Plymouth  Rock, 
bringing  with  them  stern  religious  convictions  and  severe 
morals  which  soon  ripened  into  written  laws  and  were  likewise 
woven  into  social,  political,  and  religious  life,  the  resultant 
effect  of  which,  on  human  existence  in  America,  is  never  to 
end.  One  year  later  still,  cotton  was  first  planted  in  the  virgin 
soil  of  America,  where  it  grew  to  perfection,  and  thenceforth 
becoming  the  staple  production,  made  slavery  and  slave-breed 
ing  profitable  to  the  slaveholder.1 

The  earliest  importation  of  negro  slaves  into  New  England  I 
was  to  Providence  Isle  in  the  ship  Desire  (1637).  * 

From  Boston,  Mass.  (1645),  the  first  American  ship  from  the 
colonies  set  sail  to  engage  in  the  stealing  of  African  negroes. 
Massachusetts  then  held,  under  sanction  of  law,  a  few  blacks 
and  Indians  in  bondage.3  But  slavery  did  not  flourish  in  ' 
England.  It  was  neither  profitable  nor  in  consonance  with  th< 
judgment  of  the  people  generally.  The  General  Court 

1  It  is  curious  to  note   that   1621   dates  the  first  bringing   into  Virginia   and 
America  bee-hives  for  the  production  of  honey. 

2  The  following  letter  of  Cotton  Mather  will  show  the   Puritan's  intolerance  of 
Wm.  Penn  and  the  Society  of  Friends,  and  the  prevailing  opinion  in  his  time  on 
slavery  and  the  slave  trade. 

"BOSTON,  MASSACHUSETTS,  Septembers,  1682. 

"  To  YE  AGED  AND  BELOVED  JOHN  HIGGINSON  :  There  be  now  at  sea  a  skipper 
(for  our  friend  Esaias  Holderoft  of  London  did  advise  me  by  the  last  packet  that 
it  would  sail  sometime  in  August)  called  ye  Welcome^.  Green  was  master),  which 
has  aboard  a  hundred  or  more  of  ye  heretics  and  malignants  called  Quakers,  with 
W.  Penn,  who  is  ye  scamp  at  ye  head  of  them. 

"  Ye  General  Court  has  accordingly  given  secret  orders  to  master  Malachi  Hux- 
tell  of  ye  brig  Porpoise  to  waylaye  ye  said  Welcome  as  near  ye  coast  of  Codd  as 
may  be,  and  make  captives  of  ye  Penn  and  his  ungodly  crew,  so  that  ye  Lord  may 
be  glorified,  and  not  mocked  on  ye  soil  of  this  new  country  with  ye  heathen  wor- 
shippe  of  these  people.  Much  spoil  can  be  made  by  selling  ye  whole  lot  to  Bar- 
badoes,  where  slaves  fetch  good  prices  in  rumme  and  sugar.  We  shall  not  only  do 
ye  Lord  great  service  bv  punishing  the  Wicked,  but  shall  make  gayne  for  his 
ministers  and  people.  Yours  in  the  bowels  of  Christ, 

"COTTON  MATHER." 


1 


12  Political  History  of  Slavery 

Massachusetts,  as  early  as  1646,  "  bearing  witness  against  the 
heinous  crimes  of  man-stealing,  ordered  the  recently  imported 
negroes  to  be  restored,  at  the  public  charge,  to  their  native 
country,  with  a  letter  expressing  the  indignation  of  the  General 
Court."  Unfortunately,  persons  guilty  of  stealing  men  could 
not  be  tried  for  crimes  committed  in  foreign  lands. 

But  the  African  slave  trade,  early  found  to  be  extremely 
profitable,  and  hence  popular,  did  not  cease.  England,  then 
as  now,  the  most  enterprising  of  commercial  nations  on  the 
high  seas,  engrossed  the  trade,  in  large  part,  from  1680  to 
1780.  In  1711,  there  was  established  a  slave  depot  in  New 
York  City  on  or  near  what  is  now  Wall  Street ;  and  about  the 
same  time  a  depot  was  established  for  receiving  slaves  in  Bos 
ton,  near  where  the  old  Franklin  House  stood.  From  New 
England  ships,  and  perhaps  from  others,  negroes  were  landed 
and  sent  to  these  and  other  central  slave  markets. 

But  few  of  these  freshly  stolen  negroes  were  sold  to  Northern 
slaveholders.  Slave  labor  was  not  even  then  found  profitable 
in  the  climate  of  the  North.  The  bondsman  went  to  a  more 
southern  clime,  and  to  the  cotton,  rice,  and  tobacco  fields  of 
the  large  plantations  of  the  South. 

As  late  as  1804-7,  negroes  from  the  coast  of  Africa  were 
brought  to  Boston,  Bristol,  Providence,  and  Hartford  to  be 
sold  into  slavery. 

Shipowners  of  all  the  coast  colonies,  and  later  of  all  the 
coast  States  of  the  United  States,  engaged  in  the  slave  traffic. 

But  it  was  among  the  planters  of  Maryland,  Virginia,  and 
the  Carolinas  that  slaves  proved  to  beTmost  profitable".  The 
people  r?T"TlTese  sections  were  principally  rural ;  plantations 
were  large,  not  subject  to  be  broken  up  by  frequent  partition, 
if  at  all.  The  crops  raised  were  better  suited  to  cultivation  by 
slaves  in  large  numbers ;  and  the  hot  climate  was  better  adapted 
to  the  physical  nature  of  the  African  negro. 

The  first  inhabitants  of  the  South  preferred  a  rural  life,  and 
on  large  plantations.  The  Crown  grant  to  early  proprietors 
favored  this,  especially  in  the  Virginia  and  Carolina  colonies. 
The  Puritans  did  not  love  or  foster  slavery  as  did  the  Cavalier 


Introduction  of  Slavery  into  the  Colonies     13 

of  the  South.  Castes  or  classes  existed  among  the  Southern 
settlers  from  the  beginning,  which,  with  other  favoring  causes, 
made  it  easier  for  slavery  to  take  root  and  prosper,  and  ulti 
mately  fasten  itself  upon  and  become  a  dominating  factor  in 
the  whole  social  and  political  fabric  of  the  South.  Slavery 
there  soon  came  to  be  considered  of  paramount  importance  in 
securing  a  high  social  status  or  a  high,  so-called,  civilization. 

But  we  have,  by  this  brief  resiun^  sufficiently  shown  that 
the  responsibility  for  the  introduction  and  maintenance  of 
slavery  and  the  slave  trade  does  not  rest  exclusively  on  any 
of  our  early  colonies,  North  or  South,  nor  on  any  one  race  or 
nationality  of  the  world ;  it  remains  now  to  show,  in  a  sum 
mary  way,  how  slavery  and  the  slave  trade  were  treated  and 
regarded  by  the  different  sections  of  the  United  States  after 
allegiance  to  England  was  thrown  off. 

While  slavery  died  out  from  local  and  natural  causes,  if  not 
wholly  for  moral,  social,  and  religious  reasons,  in  the  States 
north  of  Maryland,  it  flourished  and  ripened  into  strength  and 
importance  in  States  south,  casting  a  controlling  influence  and 
power  over  the  whole  of  the  United  States  socially,  and  for 
the  most  part  dominating  the  country  politically.  The  greatest 
statesmen  and  brightest  intellects  of  the  North,  though  con 
vinced  of  the  evils  of  slavery  and  of  its  fatal  tendencies,  were 
generally  too  cowardly  to  attack  it  politically,  although  but 
about  one  fifth  of  the  whole  white  population  of  the  slave 
States  in  1860,  or  perhaps  at  any  time,  was,  through  family 
relationship,  or  otherwise,  directly  or  indirectly  interested  in 
slaves  or  slave  labor. 

Old  political  parties  were  in  time  disrupted,  and  new  ones 
were  formed  on  slavery  issues. 

The  slavery  question  rent  in  twain  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
and  Presbyterian  churches.  The  followers  of  Wesley  and 
Calvin  divided  on  slavery.  It  was  always  essentially  an  aristo 
cratic  institution,  and  hence  calculated  to  benefit  only  a  few  of 
the  great  mass  of  freemen. 

In  1860,  there  was  in  the  fifteen  slave  States  a  white  popu 
lation  of  8,039,000  and  a  slave  population  of  3,953,696.  Of 


H  Political  History  of  Slavery 

the  white  population  only  384,884  were  slaveholders,  and,  in 
cluding  their  families,  only  about  1,600,000  were  directly  or 
indirectly  interested  in  slaves  or  their  labor.  About  6,400,000 
(80  per  cent.)  of  the  whites  in  these  States  had,  therefore,  no 
interest  in  the  institution,  and  yet  they  were  wholly  sub 
ordinated  to  the  few  who  were  interested  in  it. 

Curiously  enough,  slavery  continued  to  exist,  until  a  com 
paratively  recent  period,  in  many  of  the  States  that  had  early 
declared  it  abolished.  The  States  formed  out  of  the  territory 
"  Northwest  of  the  River  Ohio  "  cannot  be  said  to  have  ever 
been  slave  States.  The  sixth  section  of  the  Ordinance  of 
1787  prohibited  slavery  forever  therein.  The  slaves  reported 
in  such  States  were  only  there  by  tolerance.  They  were  free 
of  right.  The  Constitution  of  Illinois,  as  we  shall  presently 
see,  did  not  at  first  abolish  slavery ;  only  prohibited  the  intro 
duction  of  slaves. 

The  rebellion  of  the  thirteen  colonies  in  1776  and  the  war 
for  independence  did  not  grow  out  of  slavery ;  that  war  was 
waged  neither  to  perpetuate  nor  to  abolish  it.  The  Puritan 
and  Cavalier,  the  opponents  and  the  advocates  of  slavery  and 
the  slave  trade,  alike,  fought  for  independence,  and,  when 
successful,  united  in  the  purpose  to  foster  and  build  up  an 
American  Republic,  based  on  the  sovereignty  of  individual 
citizenship,  but  ignoring  the  natural  rights  of  the  enslaved 
negro. 

The  following  table,  compiled  from  United  States  Census 
Reports,  may  be  of  interest. 

It  shows  the  number  of  slaves  reported  in  each  State  and 
Territory  of  the  United  States  at  each  Federal  census.1 

1  Slavery  was  abolished  in  the  District  of  Columbia  by  law  of  Congress,  passed 
April  16,  1862. 

President  Lincoln's  proclamation  of  January  i,  1863,  emancipated  all  slaves  in 
the  seceded  States  (save  in  Tennessee  and  parts  of  Louisiana  and  Virginia  ex- 
cepted  therefrom)  to  the  number  of  3,063,395  ;  those  remaining  were  freed  by  the 
thirteenth  amendment  to  the  Constitution,  December  18,  1865. 


Declaration  of  Independence 


is; 


North 


1790 

1800 

1810 

1820 

1830 

1840 

1850 

1860 

Cal 

2  759 

951 

310 

97 

25 

17 

Ills 

168 

917 

747 

331 

Ind 

135 

237 

190 

3 

3 

16 

.., 

2 

2 

Mass 

1 

Mich 

24 

32 

Neb 



;  

15 

N    H 

158 

8 

3 

1 

N.  J  

N  Y 

11,423 
21  324 

12.422 
20343 

10,851 
15  017 

7.557 
10  088 

2.254 
75 

674 
4 

236 

18 

Ohio 

g 

3 

Penn 

3737 

1  706 

796 

211 

403 

C4 

R    I  

952 

381 

108 

48 

17 

5 

Utah.    .    . 

20 

29 

17 

Wis 

]\ 

Totals  

40,370 

' 

35,646 

27.510 

19,108 

3,568 

1,129 

262 

64 

Soutli 


D.  C  

Ala 

3,244 

5,395 

6,377 

41  879 

6.119 
117  549 

4,694 
253  532 

3.687 
342844 

3,185 
435080 

Ark 

1  617 

5  476 

19  935 

47  100 

111  115 

Del.  

8,887 

6,153 

4,177 

4,509 

3,292 
16501 

2,605 
25717 

2,290 
39  310 

1,798 
61  745 

Ga 

29  264 

59  404 

105  218 

149  654 

217  531 

280  944 

381  682 

462  198 

£'  :•- 

11,830 

40,343 

80,561 
34  660 

126,732 
69  064 

165,213 

109  588 

182.258 
1  08  452 

210.981 
244  809 

225,483 
331  726 

Md  

103,036 

105,635 

111.502 

107,397 

102,994 

89.737 

90.368 

87,189 

Miss     

3,489 

17088 

32814 

65  659 

195  211 

309  878 

436,631 

Mo 

3  Oil 

10222 

25  0°»1 

58  240 

87422 

114  931 

N.  C  

s.c  

Tenn  
Tex 

100,572 
107,094 
3,417 

ia3.296 
146.151 
13,584 

168,824 
196,365 
44,535 

205,017 
258.475 
80,107 

245.601 
315,401 
141,603 

245,817 
327.0:38 
183,059 

288,548 
384,984 
239,459 
58  161 

331,059 
402.406 
275,719 
1^2  566 

Va  

293,427 

345,796 

392,518 

425,153 

469,757 

449,087 

472,528 

490,865 

Totals  

657,527 

857,095 

1,163,854 

1,519,017 

2,005,475 

2,486,326 

3,204,051 

3,953,696 

Grand  totals. 

697,897 

892,741 

1,191,364 

1,538,125 

2,009,043 

2,487,455 

3,204,313 

3,953,760 

III 


DECLARATION    OF    INDEPENDENCE 

The  Declaration  of  Independence,  though  accepted  at  once 
and  to  be  regarded  through  all  time  by  the  liberty-loving  world 
as  the  best  and  boldest  declaration  in  favor  of  human  rights, 
and  the  most  pronounced  protest  against  oppression  of  the 
human  race,  is  totally  silent  as  to  the  rights  of  the  slaves  in 


16  Political  History  of  Slavery 

the  colonies.  It  is  true  that  Jefferson  in  his  draft  of  this  in 
strument,  in  the  articles  of  indictment  against  King  George 
III.,  used  this  language: 

"  He  has  waged  cruel  war  against  human  nature  itself,  violating 
its  most  sacred  rights  of  life  and  liberty  in  the  persons  of  distant 
people  who  never  offended  him,  captivating  and  carrying  them  into 
slavery  in  another  hemisphere,  or  to  incur  miserable  death  in  the 
transportation  thither,  .  .  .  determined  to  keep  open  a  market 
where  men  should  be  bought  and  sold;  he  has  prostituted  his  nega 
tive  for  suppressing  every  legislative  attempt  to  prohibit  or  restrain 
this  execrable  commerce." 

To  conciliate  Georgia  and  South  Carolina,  this  part  of  the 
indictment  was  struck  out.  These  colonies  had  never  sought 
to  restrain,  but  had  always  fostered,  the  slave  trade.  Jeffer 
son,  in  his  Autobiography  (vol.  i.,  p.  19),  suggests  that  other 
sections  sympathized  with  Georgia  and  South  Carolina  in  this 
matter. 

"  Our  Northern  brethren  .  .  .  felt  a  little  tender  under  these 
censures:  for  though  their  people  had  very  few  slaves  themselves, 
yet  they  had  been  considerable  carriers  of  them  to  others." 

Jefferson  said  King  George  preferred  the  advantage 

"  of  a  few  British  corsairs  to  the  lasting  interests  of  the  American 
States  and  to  the  rights  of  human  nature,  deeply  wounded  by  this 
infamous  practice."  l 

While  it  is  not  true,  as  has  often  been  claimed,  that  England 
is  solely  responsible  for  the  introduction  of  slavery  into  her 
American  colonies,  it  is  true  that  her  King  and  Parliament 
opposed  almost  every  attempt  to  prohibit  it  or  to  restrict  the 
importation  of  slaves.  Colonial  legislative  enactments  of  Vir 
ginia  and  of  other  colonies  directed  against  slavery  were  vetoed 
by  the  King  or  by  his  command  by  his  royal  governors.  Such 
governors  were  early  forbidden  to  give  their  assent  to  any 
measure  restricting  slavery  in  the  American  colonies,  and  this 
policy  was  pursued  until  the  colonies  became  independent.2 

1  Parton's  Life  of  Jefferson,  p.  138. 

2 History  Ready  Reference,  etc.,  vol.  iv.,  p.  2923. 


Declaration  of  Independence  17 

The  treaty  of  peace  between  Great  Britain  and  the  United 
States,  signed  at  Paris,  September  3,  1783,  contained  a  stipu 
lation  that  Great  Britain  should  withdraw  her  armies  from  the 
United  States  "  with  all  convenient  speed,  and  without  causing 
any  destruction,  or  carrying  away  any  negroes  or  other  property 
of  the  American  inhabitants. ' '  Both  governments  thus  openly 
recognized,  not  only  the  existence  of  slavery  in  the  United 
States,  but  that  slaves  were  merely  property. 

While  slavery  was  deeply  seated  in  the  colonies  and  had 
many  advocates,  including  noted  divines,  who  preached  the 
"  divinity  of  slavery,"  there  were,  in  1776,  and  earlier,  many 
great  men,  South  as  well  as  North,  who  looked  confidently  to 
an  early  emancipation  of  slaves,  and  who  were  then  active  in 
suppressing  the  African  slave  trade,  among  whom  were  Jeffer 
son,  Washington,  Franklin,  and  the  two  Adamses. 

Washington  presided  at  a  "  Fairfax  County  Convention," 
before  the  Revolution.  It  resolved  that"  no  slaves  ought  to 

o 

be  imported  into  any  of  the  British  colonies  "  ;  and  Washing 
ton  himself  expressed  "  the  most  earnest  wish  to  see  an  entire 
stop  forever  put  to  such  a  wicked,  cruel,  and  unnatural  trade. ' '  l 

John  Wesley,  when  fully  acquainted  with  American  slavery 
and  the  slave  trade,  pronounced  the  latter  as  "  the  execrable 
sum  of  all  villainies,'"  and  he  inveighed  against  the  former  as 
the  wickedest  of  human  practices. 

The  Continental  Congress  of  1776  resolved,  "  that  no  slaves  1 
be  imported  into  any  of  the  thirteen  United  Colonies." 

There  had  then  been  imported  by  the  cruel  traffic  above 
300,000  blacks,  bought  or  stolen  from  the  African  shore;  and 
the  blacks  then  constituted  twenty  per  cent,  of  the  total  popu 
lation,  a  greater  per  centum  than  at  any  time  since. 

During  the  century  previous  to  1776,  English  and  colonial 
slavers  had  carried  into  the  West  Indies  and  to  English  colonies 
nearly  3,000,000  negroes;  and  it  is  estimated  that  a  quarter  of 
a  million  more  died  of  cruel  treatment  on  shipboard,  and  their 
bodies  were  cast  into  the  sea. 

The  words  of  the  Declaration:  "  We  hold  these  truths  to 

1  Sparks's  Life  of  Washington,  vol.  ii.,  p.  494. 


i8  Political  History  of  Slavery 

be  self-evident :  that  all  men  are  created  equal ;  that  they  are 
endowed  by  their  Creator  with  certain  inalienable  rights ;  that 
among  these  are  life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness," 
were  not  accepted  in  fact  as  a  charter  of  freedom  for  the  en 
slaved  African,  but  it  remained  for  a  Chief-Justice  of  the 
United  States  (Taney)  more  than  eighty  years  later  (March  6, 
1857),  in  the  Dred  Scott  decision,  that  did  so  much  (as  we  will 
hereafter  show)  to  disrupt  the  Union,  to  say : 

'  The  language  used  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence  shows 
that  neither  the  class  of  persons  who  had  been  imported  as  slaves, 
nor  their  descendants,  whether  they  had  become  free  or  not,  were 
then  acknowledged  as  a  part  of  the  people,  nor  intended  to  be  in 
cluded  in  the  general  words  used." 

And  this  Chief-Justice  said  further: 

'  They  [the  negroes]  had  for  more  than  a  century  before  been 
regarded  as  beings  of  an  inferior  order,  and  altogether  unfit  to  as 
sociate  with  the  white  race,  either  in  social  or  political  relations: 
and  so  far  inferior  that  they  had  no  rights  which  the  white  man  was 
bound  to  respect,  and  that  the  negro  might  justly  and  lawfully  be 
reduced  to  slavery  for  his  benefit." 

Quoting  the  Declaration,  "  that  all  men  are  created  equal" 
he  continued : 

'  The  general  words  above  quoted  would  seem  to  embrace  the 
whole  human  family,  and  if  they  were  used  in  a  similar  instrument 
at  this  day  would  be  so  understood.  But  it  is  too  clear  for  dispute 
that  the  enslaved  African  race  were  not  intended  to  be  included,  and 
formed  no  part  of  the  people  who  framed  and  adopted  this  Declara 
tion." 

Notwithstanding  this  interpretation  of  the  Declaration,  free 
negroes  fought  for  American  independence  at  Bunker  Hill; 
and  although  later  it  was  decided  that  colored  men  should  not 
be  accepted  as  enlisted  soldiers,  General  Washington  did  ac 
cept  them,  and  thereafter  they  served  in  his  army  to  the  end 
of  the  war,1  notably  in  large  numbers  at  Yorktown. 

1  Bancroft,  History  of  the  United  States,  vol.  iv.,  223,  322. 


Articles  of  Confederation  19 

The  Royal  Governor  of  Virginia  in  vain  tried  to  induce  slaves 
to  revolt  against  their  masters  by  promising  them  their  free 
dom. 

During  Lord  Howe's  march  through  Pennsylvania  it  is  said 
the  slaves  prayed  for  his  success,  believing  he  would  set  them 
free. 

The  British  Parliament  discussed  a  measure  to  set  the  slaves 
in  the  colonies  free  with  a  view  to  weaken  their  masters'  ardor 
for  freedom.  In  Rhode  Island  slaves  were,  by  law,  set  free 
on  condition  that  they  enlisted  in  the  army  for  the  war. 


IV 

CONTINENTAL    CONGRESS ARTICLES    OF    CONFEDERATION 

1774-1789 

The  Continental  Congress,  which  assembled  for  the  first 
time,  September  5,  1774,  at  Carpenters'  Hall,  Philadelphia, 
assumed  few  powers,  and  its  proceedings  were,  until  the  adop 
tion  by  it  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  little  more  than 
protests  against  British  oppression.  Nor  was  any  central  gov 
ernment  formed  on  the  adoption  of  the  Declaration.  That 
Congress  continued,  by  common  agreement,  to  direct  affairs, 
though,  in  the  beginning,  possessing  no  delegated  political  or 
governmental  powers. 

Slavery  existed  in  the  colonies  or  States  prior  to  the  Declara 
tion  by  the  connivance  of  British  colonial  authorities  without 
the  sanction  of  and  against  English  law ;  and  after  the  Declara 
tion,  by  mere  toleration  as  an  existing  domestic  institution, 
not  even  by  virtue  of  express  colonial  or  State  authority. 

In  1772  Lord  Mansfield,  from  the  Court  of  the  King's  Bench, 
announced  that  slavery  could  not  exist  under  the  English 
Constitution. 

The  Articles  of  Confederation  did  nothing  more  than  formu 
late,  in  a  weak  way,  a  government  for  the  United  States,  solely 
through  a  Congress  to  which  there  was  delegated  little  political 
power.  This  Congress  continued  to  govern  (if  government  it 


20  Political  History  of  Slavery 

could  be  called)  until  the  Constitution  went  into  effect,  March 

4,  1/89. 

The  "  Articles  of  Confederation , "  adopted  (July  9,  1778)  by 
the  Continental  Congress  of  the  thirteen  original  States  in  the 
midst  of  the  Revolution,  were  substantially  silent  on  slavery. 
They  constituted  in  all  respects  a  weak  and  impotent  instru 
ment.  But  they  recognized  the  existence  of  slavery  by  speak 
ing  of  free  citizens  (Art.  4). 

They  provided  for  a  "  Confederation  and  perpetual  Union  " 
between  the  thirteen  States,  but  provided  no  power  to  raise 
revenue,  levy  taxes,  or  enforce  law,  save  with  the  consent  of 
nine  of  the  States.  The  government  created  had  power  to 
contract  debts,  but  no  power  to  pay  them  ;  it  could  levy  war, 
raise  armies  and  navies,  but  it  could  not  raise  revenue  to  sustain 
them ;  it  could  make  treaties,  but  could  not  compel  their  ob 
servance  by  the  States;  it  could  make  laws,  but  could  not 
enforce  them. 

Washington  said  of  it : 

4  The  Confederation  appears  to  be  little  more  than  a  shadow 
without  the  substance,  and  Congress  a  nugatory  body." 

Chief-Justice  Story  said: 

"  There  was  an  utter  want  of  all  coercive  authority  to  carry  into 
effect  its  own  constitutional  measures." 

The  Articles  were,  professedly,  not  in  the  interest  of  the 
whole  people. 

They  provided  only  for  a  "  league  "  of  states,  guaranteeing 
to  each  state-rights  in  all  things. 

Art.  IV.  runs  thus: 

"  The  better  to  secure  and  perpetuate  mutual  friendship  and 
intercourse  among  the  people  of  the  different  States  of  this  Union, 
the  free  inhabitants  of  each  of  these  States,  paupers,  vagabonds,  and 
fugitives  from  justice  excepted,  shall  be  entitled  to  all  the  privileges 
and  immunities  of  free  citizens  in  the  several  States,"  etc. 

What  a  classification  of  persons  for  exception  from  the 
privileges  of  government! 


Ordinance  of  1787  21 

Free  negroes  were  not  of  the  excepted  class.  Nor  were 
criminals,  unless  they  became  fugitives  from  justice. 

For  ten  years  the  new  Republic  existed  under  these  Articles 
by  the  tolerance  of  a  people  bound  together  by  the  spirit  of 
liberty  and  the  cohesion  of  patriotism. 

The  Articles  created  no  status  for  slavery,  nor  did  they  in 
terfere  with  it  in  the  States.  They  made  no  provision  for  a 
fugitive-slave  law,  if,  indeed,  such  a  law  was  dreamed  of  until 
after  the  Constitution  went  into  effect. 

The  Articles  of  Confederation  provided  no  executive  head, 
no  supreme  judiciary,  and  they  provided  for  no  perfect  legis 
lative  body,  organized  on  the  principle  of  checks  and  restraints, 
possessed  of  true  republican  representation.  Congress — the 
sole  governing  power — was  composed  of  one  body,  each  State 
sending  not  less  than  two  or  more  than  seven  representatives. 
The  voting  in  this  body  was  done  by  States,  each  State  having 
one  vote. 

It  therefore  soon  became  necessary  to  frame  and  adopt  a 
new  organic  act,  supplementing  the  many  deficiencies  of  these 
Articles. 


ORDINANCE    OF    1787 

The  memorable  Congress  of  1776  was  willing  to  do  much  to 
the  end  that  slavery  might  be  restricted,  hence,  as  we  have 
seen,  it  resolved  "  that  no  slaves  be  imported  into  any  of  the 
thirteen  United  Colonies." 

Had  it  been  possible  thus  early  to  stop  effectually  the  slave 
trade,  and  to  prevent  the  extension  of  slavery  to  new  territory, 
slavery  would  have  died  out.  Jefferson  sought,  shortly  after 
the  treaty  of  peace,  to  prohibit  slavery  extension,  and  to  this 
end  he  prepared  and  reported  an  Ordinance  (1784)  prohibiting 
slavery  after  the y tar  1800  in  all  the  territory  then  belonging 
to  the  United  States  above  the  parallel  of  31°  north  latitude, 
which  included  what  became  the  principal  parts  of  the  slave 
States  of  Alabama  and  Mississippi,  all  of  Tennessee  and 


22  Political  History  of  Slavery 

Kentucky,  as  well  as  the  whole  Northwest  Territory.  In 
1784  the  United  States  owned  no  territory  south  of  31°  north 
latitude. 

This  Ordinance  of  freedom  was  lost  by  a  single  vote.  Had 
that  one  vote  been  reversed,  what  a  "  hell  of  agony  "  would 
have  been  closed,  and  what  a  sea  of  blood  would  have  been 
saved !  Slavery  would  have  died  in  the  hands  of  its  friends 
and  the  new  Republic  would  have  soon  been  free  in  fact  as 
well  as  name. 

Jefferson,  though  himself  a  slaveholder,  was  desperately  in 
earnest  in  advocacy  of  this  Ordinance,  and,  speaking  of  its 
prohibitory  slave-clause  two  years  later,  he  wrote : 

'  The  voice  of  a  single  individual  would  have  prevented  this 
abominable  crime.  Heaven  will  not  always  be  silent;  the  friends  to 
the  rights  of  human  nature  will  in  the  end  prevail." 

The  most  important  victory  for  freedom  in  the  civil  history 
of 'the  United  States  (until  the  Rebellion  of  1861)  was  the 
Ordinance  of  1787,  reported  by  Nathan  Dane,2  of  Massachu 
setts,  as  a  substitute  for  the  defeated  one  just  referred  to,  but 
differing  from  it  in  two  important  respects : 

(1)  It  applied  only  to  the  territory  northwest  of  the  River 
Ohio  recently  (March  i,  1784)  ceded  to  the  United  States  by 
Virginia; 

(2)  It  prohibited  slavery  at  once  and  forever  therein.     Its 
sixth  section  is  in  these  words : 

"  There  shall  be  neither  slavery  nor  involuntary  servitude  in  the 
said  territory,  otherwise  than  in  the  punishment  of  crimes,  whereof 
the  party  shall  have  been  duly  convicted." 

1  Jefferson's  Works,  vol.  ix.,  276. 

2  The  authorship  of  the  admirably-drawn  Ordinance  has  been  much  in  dispute. 
Thomas  H.  Benton,  Gov.  Edward  Coles,  and  others  attribute  the  authorship  to 
Jefferson  ;    Daniel  Webster  and  others  to  Nathan  Dane,  while  a  son  of  Rufus 
King  claimed  him  to  be   the  author  of  the  article  prohibiting  slavery.     Wm. 
Frederick  Poole,  in  a  contribution  to  the  North  American  Review,  gives  much  of 
the  credit  of  authorship  to  Mr.  Dane,  but  the  chief  credit  for  the  formation  and 
the  entire  credit  for  the  passage  of  the  Ordinance  to  Dr.  Manasseh  Cutler,  St. 
Clair  Papers,  vol.  i.,  p.  122. 


Ordinance  of  1787  23 

But  it  has  been,  with  much  force,  claimed  by  those  who 
denied  the  binding  character  of  this  Ordinance,  that  as  it  was 
an  act  of  the  old  Congress  under  the  Articles  of  Confederation, 
and  established  a  territorial  form  of  government,  not  in  all 
respects  in  conformity  to  the  Constitution,  it  was  necessarily 
superseded  by  it. 

This  view  was  general  on  the  meeting  of  the  First  Congress 
(1789)  under  the  Constitution,  but  the  Ordinance,  so  dear  to 
the  hearts  of  Jefferson  and  other  lovers  of  liberty,  was  early 
attended  to. 

On  August  7,  1789,  the  eighth  act  of  the  First  Congress, 
embodying  a  long  explanatory  and  declaratory  preamble,  was 
passed,  and  approved  by  President  Washington.  This  act  in 
effect  reenacted  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  adapting  and  applying 
it,  however,  to  the  Constitution  by  requiring  the  Governor  of 
the  Northwest  Territory  to  report  and  become  responsible  to 
the  President  of  the  United  States,  instead  of  to  Congress  as 
originally  provided.1 

The  territory  which  the  ordinance  governed  was  in  area 
260,000  square  miles,  and  included  what  is  now  the  great 
States  of  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Michigan,  and  Wisconsin, 
with,  in  1890,  13,471,840  inhabitants. 

The  Ordinance  is  a  model  of  perfection.  It  was  the  only 
great  act  of  legislation  under  the  Articles  of  Confederation . 
There  is  evidence  that,  as  some'members  of  the  Congress  that 
enacted  the  Ordinance  were  at  the  same  time  members  of  the 
Convention  that  framed  the  Constitution,2  there  was  much  in 
tercommunication  of  views  between  the  members  of  the  two 

1  On  the  continuing  binding  force  of  the  Ordinance  on  States  formed  out  of  the 
Northwest  Territory  there  has  been  some  contrariety  of  opinion.     In  Ohio  it  was 
early  held  the  Ordinance  was  more  obligatory  than  the  State  Constitution,  which 
might  be  amended  by  the  people  of  the  State,  whereas  the  Ordinance  could  not. 
(5  Ohio,  410,  416.)     But  see:   10  Howard  (U.  S.),  82,  and  3  Howard,  589. 

2  Madison  of  Virginia,    Rufus   King  of  New  York,   Johnson  of  Connecticut, 
Blount  and  Charles  Pinckney  of  South  Carolina,  and  Few  of  Georgia  were  mem 
bers  of  both  bodies. — Historical  Ex.,  etc.,  Dred  Scott  Case  (Benton),  p.  37  n. 

The  Ordinance  was  adopted  July  13,  1787  ;  the  Constitution  was  adopted  by 
the  Convention  September  17,  1787. 


24  Political  History  of  Slavery 

bodies,  especially  on  the  slavery  clause  of  the  Ordinance.  It 
is  probable  that  the  clause  of  the  Constitution  respecting  the 
rendition  of  slaves,  as  well  as  other  provisions,  was  copied 
from  the  Ordinance.1 

Upon  the  surpassing  excellence  of  this  Ordinance,  no  lan 
guage  of  panegyric  would  be  extravagant. 

It  is  a  matchless  specimen  of  sagacious  forecast.  It  pro 
vides  for  the  descent  of  property,  for  the  appointment  of  ter 
ritorial  officers,  and  for  extending  the  fundamental  principles 
of  civil  and  religious  liberty  by  securing  religious  freedom  to 
the  inhabitants.  It  prohibits  legislative  interference  with 
private  contracts,  secures  the  benefit  of  the  writ  of  Jiabeas 
corpus,  trial  by  jury,  and  of  the  common  law  in  judicial  pro 
ceedings:  it  forbids  the  infliction  of  cruel  or  unusual  punish 
ments,  and  enjoins  the  encouragement  of  schools  and  the 
means  of  education. 

The  Ordinance  has  not  only  stood,  unaltered,  as  the  charter 
of  government  for  the  Northwest  Territory,  but  its  clause 
respecting  slavery  was  incorporated  into  most  of  the  acts 
passed  prior  to  the  Rebellion  providing  for  territorial  govern 
ments. 

Historically,  it  will  stand  as  the  great  Magna  Charta,  which, 
by  the  prescient  wisdom  of  our  fathers,  dedicated  in  advance 
of  the  coming  civilization  the  fertile  and  beautiful  Northwest, 
with  all  its  possibilities,  for  all  time,  to  freedom,  education, 
and  liberty  of  conscience. 

Frequent  efforts  to  rescind  or  suspend  the  clause  restricting 
slavery  were  made,  especially  after  Indiana  Territory  was 
formed  in  1800. 

At  the  adoption  of  the  Ordinance  some  slaves  were  held  in 
what  is  now  Indiana  and  Illinois  by  immigrants  from  Southern 
States.  Slavery  also  existed  at  the  Vincennes,  Kaskaskia, 
Cahokia,  and  other  French  settlements,  where  it  had  been 
planted  under  the  authority  of  the  King  of  France  while  the 
territory  was  a  part  of  the  French  possessions.  The  Govern 
ment  of  Great  Britain  authorized  the  continuance  of  slavery 

1  St.  Clair  Papers,  vol.  i.,  p.  134. 


Ordinance  of  1787  25 

when  the  territory  was  under  its  jurisdiction.  Indians  as  well 
as  black  men  were  held  as  slaves  in  the  French  settlements.1 

Immigrants  and  old  inhabitants  favorable  to  slavery  united 
in  memorials  to  Congress  asking  a  suspension  of  the  article 
prohibiting  slavery.  The  first  of  these  was  reported  on  ad 
versely  by  a  committee  of  Congress,  May  12,  1796.  Governor 
William  Henry  Harrison,  December,  1802,  presided,  at  Vin- 
cennes,  over  a  meeting  of  citizens  of  the  Indiana  Territory,  at 
which  it  was  resolved  to  make  an  effort  to  secure  a  suspension 
of  this  article.  A  memorial  was  drawn  up,  which  Governor 
Harrison,  with  a  letter  of  his  own  favoring  it,  forwarded  to 
Congress.  They  were  referred  to  a  special  committee,  of 
which  John  Randolph,  of  Virginia,  was  chairman. 

He,  March  2,  1803,  reported: 

'  That  it  is  inexpedient  to  suspend,  even  for  a  limited  time,  the 
operation  of  the  sixth  article  of  the  compact  between  the  original 
States  and  the  people  and  States  west  of  the  river  Ohio." 

Adding,  by  way  of  reason,  that 

'  The  rapid  population  of  the  State  of  Ohio  sufficiently  evinces,  in 
the  opinion  of  your  committee,  that  the  labor  of  slaves  is  not  neces 
sary  to  promote  the  growth  and  settlement  of  the  colonies  in  that 
region." 

This  did  not  end  the  effort  to  secure  slavery  in  the  Indiana 
Territory.  In  March,  1804,  a  special  committee  of  Congress 
reported  in  favor  of  the  suspension  of  the  inhibition  for  ten 
years;  a  similar  report  was  made  in  1806  by  Mr.  Garnett,  of 
Virginia;  and  in  1807  Mr.  Parker,  delegate  from  Indiana,  re 
ported  favorably  on  a  memorial  of  Governor  Harrison  and  the 
Territorial  Legislature,  praying  for  a  suspension  of  that  part 
of  the  Ordinance  relating  to  slavery.  These  reports  were  not 
acted  on  in  the  House.  Subsequently,  Governor  Harrison 
and  his  Legislature  appealed  to  the  Senate  and  a  special  com 
mittee  to  suspend  the  article,  but  when  the  committee  reported 

'Dunn's  Indiana,  p.  126. 


26  Political  History  of  Slavery 

adversely,  all  efforts  to  break  down  the  legal  barrier  to  slavery 
in  the  Northwest  Territory  ceased.1 

But  notwithstanding  the  mandatory  terms  of  the  Ordinance 
and  the  reported  failures  in  Congress  to  suspend  the  provision 
relating  to  slavery,  it  existed  in  the  Northwest  throughout  its 
territorial  existence  and  in  the  State  of  Illinois  until  i844-2 
The  early  slaveholding  inhabitants  well  understood  the  Ordi 
nance  to  mean  the  absolute  emancipation  of  their  slaves,  and 
hence  manumitted  them  or  commenced  to  remove  them  to 
the  Spanish  territory  beyond  the  Mississippi.  Some  few  of 
the  inhabitants  complained  to  Governor  St.  Clair  that  the  in 
hibition  against  slavery  retarded  the  growth  of  the  Territory. 
He  volunteered  the  opinion  that  the  Ordinance  was  not  retro 
active;  that  it  did  not  apply  to  existing  conditions;  that  it 
was  "  a  declaration  of  a  principle  which  was  to  govern  the 
Legislature  in  all  acts  respecting  that  matter  (slavery)  and  the 
courts  of  justice  in  their  decisions  in  cases  arising  after  the  date 
of  the  Ordinance";  and  that  if  Congress  had  intended  the 
immediate  emancipation  of  slaves,  compensation  would  have 
been  provided  for  to  their  owners.  But  he  admitted  Congress 
"  had  the  right  to  determine  that  property  of  that  kind  after 
wards  acquired  should  not  be  protected  in  future,  and  that 
slaves  imported  into  the  Territory  after  that  declaration  might 
reclaim  their  freedom."  This  unfortunate  opinion  operated 
to  continue  slavery  in  the  Territory,  and  fostered  the  idea  that 
the  sixth  article  might  be  annulled  and  slavery  be  made  per 
petual  in  the  Territory.  Governor  St.  Clair  was  President  of 
the  Congress  when  the  Ordinance  was  passed,  and  his  opinion 
in  relation  to  it  was  therefore  given  much  weight. 

By  Act  of  Congress,  passed  May  7,  1800,  what  is  now  the 
State  of  Ohio  became  the  Territory  of  Ohio,  and  that  part  of 

1  St.    Clair  Papers,  vol.  i.,  pp.  120-1,  note.     Historical  Ex.,  etc.,  Dred  Scott 
Case,  pp.  32-47,  etc.     Political  Text  Book,  1860  (McPherson),  pp.  53-4. 

2  Not  until  1844  did  the  highest  court  of  Illinois  decide  (four  to  three)  that  a 
colored  man,  held  as  a  slave  by  a  descendant  of  an  old  French  family,  was  free. 
Jarrot  case  (2  Gillman),  7  ///. ,  i. 

2  St.  Clair  Papers,  vol.  i.,  pp.  120,  206,  and  vol.  ii.,  pp.  117-119,  318,  331. 


Ordinance  of  1787  27 

the  Northwest  Territory  lying  west  and  north  of  Ohio  was 
erected  into  the  Territory  of  Indiana;  by  like  Acts,  January 
n,  1805,  the  Territory  of  Michigan  was  formed,  and  February 
3,  1809,  all  that  part  lying  west  of  Indiana  and  Lake  Michi 
gan  became  the  Territory  of  Illinois.  Prior,  however,  to  the 
last  Act,  the  Legislature  of  Indiana  Territory  (September  17, 
1807)  passed  an  act  "  to  encourage  emigration,"  making  it  law 
ful  to  bring  negroes  and  mulattoes  into  the  Territory,  "  owing 
service  or  labor  as  slaves." 

The  act  provided  that  these  people  and  their  children  should 
be  held  for  a  term  of  years,  and  if  they  refused  to  serve  as 
slaves  they  might  be  removed,  "  within  sixty  days  thereafter," 
to  any  place  where  they  could  be  lawfully  held.  This  statute 
was  substantially  reenacted  by  the  Legislature  of  the  Terri 
tory  of  Illinois  in  1812. 

The  first  Constitution  (1818)  of  Illinois  did  not  prohibit 
slavery.  The  first  section  of  Article  VI.  declared  that: 
'*  Neither  slavery  nor  involuntary  servitude  shall  hereafter  be 
introduced  into  this  State,  otherwise  than  for  the  punishment 
of  crimes."  Slavery  existed  in  Illinois  after  it  became  a  State. 
The  French  and  Canadian  inhabitants  or  their  descendants 
continued  to  hold  colored  and  Indian  slaves,  and  others  were 
held  under  the  Territorial  Acts  of  1807  and  1812.  The  old 
slaves  and  their  descendants,  held  at  the  time  of  the  cession 
by  Virginia  to  the  United  States,  were  sold  from  hand  to  hand 
in  the  State,  and  transported  to  and  sold  in  other  slave  States.1 

The  Constitution  of  Indiana  (1816)  prohibited  slavery,  but 
slaves  were  held  therein  until  its  Supreme  Court  in  1820,  in  a 
habeas  corpus  case,  held  the  Constitution  freed  all  persons 
hitherto  held  in  bondage,  including  the  old  French  slaves, 
regardless  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  of  the  deed  of  cession  of 
Virginia,  or  of  any  treaty  stipulations.2 

After  the  separation  (1805)  of  Michigan  from  Indiana,  the 

1  Much  valuable  information  in  relation  to  the  legal  history  of  slavery  in  the 
Northwest  has  been  obtained  from  the  manuscript  of  "  An  Unwritten  Chapter  of 
Illinois,"  by  ex-U.  S.  Judge  Blodgett,  of  Chicago. 

2  State  vs.  Lasselle,  I  Blatchford,  60. 


28  Political  History  of  Slavery 

former's  Territorial  Chief-Justice  held  slavery  existed  in  Michi 
gan  by  virtue  of  the  Jay  treaty  (1796)  with  Great  Britain  (not 
otherwise)  notwithstanding  the  Ordinance  of  1787,'  but  Michi 
gan's  Constitution  (1837)  put  an  end  to  slavery  in  the  State,  as 
did  also  the  Constitution  (1802)  of  Ohio,  likewise  the  Constitu 
tion  (1848)  of  Wisconsin.  Slaves  shown  by  census  reports  in 
Ohio,  Indiana,  Michigan,  and  Wisconsin  after  they  became 
States,  were  there  by  tolerance,  not  by  legal  right. 

Whatever  contrariety  of  views  obtained,  and  regardless  of 
the  conflicting  opinions  of  the  courts  or  judges  as  to  the  effect 
of  the  great  Ordinance  on  the  condition  of  the  slaves  in  the 
Northwestern  Territory,  certain  it  is  that  the  Ordinance  oper 
ated  to  prevent,  after  its  date,  the  legal  importation  of  slaves 
into  the  Territory,  and  hence  resulted  in  each  of  the  States 
formed  therefrom  becoming  free  States.  In  the  light  of  his 
tory  it  seems  certain  that  at  least  Indiana  and  Illinois  would 
have  become  slave  States  but  for  the  Ordinance/ 

This  Ordinance  contained  a  clause  requiring  the  rendition  of 
fugitives  from  "  service  or  labor,"  and  being  applicable  to  only 
a  part  of  the  Territory  of  the  United  States,  partook  of  the 
nature  of  a  compromise  on  the  slavery  question,3  and  was  the 
first  of  a  series  of  compromises,  some  of  which  are  found  in 
the  Federal  Constitution,  others  in  the  Act  of  1820  admitting 
Missouri  as  a  State,  and  also  the  Compromise  Measures  of 
1850,  in  which  Clay,  Webster,  Calhoun,  Seward,  and  others  of 
the  great  statesmen  of  the  Union  participated,  all  of  which 
were,  however,  ruthlessly  overthrown  by  the  Nebraska  Act 
(1854),  of  which  Douglas,  of  Illinois,  was  the  author. 

The  slavery-restriction  section  of  the  Ordinance  was  copied 
into  and  became  a  part  of  the  Act  of  1848  organizing  the  Terri 
tory  of  Oregon,  the  champions  of  slavery,  then  in  Congress, 
voting  therefor;  and  three  years  after  the  enactment  of  the 

1  Cooley's  Michigan,  pp.  136-7. 

2  For  an  exhaustive  legal  history  of  the  slavery  restriction  clause  of  the  Ordi 
nance  and  its  effect  on  slavery  in  the  Northwest  Territory,  see  Dunn's  Indiana,  pp. 
219-260. 

3  St.  Clair  Papers,  vol.  i.,  p.  122,  note. 


Ordinance  of  1787  29 

Compromise  Measures  of  1850,  this  provision  of  the  Ordinance 
was  again  extended  over  the  newly  organized  Territory  of 
Washington  by  the  concurrent  votes  of  substantially  the  same 
persons  who  voted,  a  year  later,  that  all  such  legislation  was 
unconstitutional. 

But  neither  origin,  age,  nor  precedent  then  sanctified  any 
thing  in  the  interest  of  freedom, — slavery  only  could  appeal 
to  such  things  for  justification.  The  propagators  of  human 
slavery  were  on  the  track  of  this  Ordinance ;  they  overtook 
and  overthrew  it  by  Congressional  legislation  in  1854;  then  by 
the  Dred  Scott  decision  of  1857,  as  we  shall  soon  see.  But  it 
reappeared  in  principle,  in  1862,  as  we  shall  also  see,  and  spread 
its  wings  of  universal  liberty  (as  was  its  great  author's  purpose 
in  1784)  over  all  the  territory  belonging  to  the  United  States, 
to  remain  irrepealable  through  time,  immortalized  by  the  ap 
proval  of  President  Lincoln,  and  endorsed  by  the  just  judgment 
of  enlightened  mankind. 

Virginia,  North  Carolina,  and  Georgia  each  held  territory 
not  subject  to  the  Ordinance  of  1787. 

North  Carolina  (December,  1789),  in  ceding  her  territory 
west  of  her  present  limits,  provided  that: 

No  regulations  made  or  to  be  made  by  Congress  shall  tend 
to  emancipate  slaves." 

Thus  Tennessee  became  a  slave  State. 

A  year  later  (1790)  Virginia  consented  to  relinquish  her  re 
maining  territory;  as  Kentucky  it  was  (June  I,  1792)  admitted 
into  the  Union  and  became  a  slave  State,  without  ever  having 
a  separate  territorial  organization. 

Georgia,  in  1802,  ceded  the  territory  on  her  west  to  the 
United  States,  and  provided  that  the  Ordinance  of  1787  should 
extend  to  the  ceded  territory,  "  the  article  only  excepted 
which  forbids  slavery."  Thus,  later,  Alabama  and  Mississippi 
each  became  a  slave  State.1 

1  Political  Text-Book,  1860  (McPherson),  p.  53. 


30  Political  History  of  Slavery 

VI 

CONSTITUTION    OF    THE    UNITED    STATES 

The  Convention  to  frame  the  Constitution  met  in  Philadel 
phia  (1/87).  George  Washington  was  its  President;  it  was 
composed  of  the  leading  statesmen  of  the  new  nation,  sitting 
in  a  delegate  capacity,  but  in  voting  on  measures  the  rule 
of  the  then  Congress  was  observed,  which  was  to  vote  by 
States. 

The  majority  of  the  thirteen  States  were  then  slave  States, 
and  all,  save  Massachusetts,  still  held  slaves ;  and  all  the  coast 
States  indulged  in  the  African  slave  trade. 

Massachusetts  provided  for  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  1780 
by  constitutional  provision  declaring  that : 

"  All  men  are  born  free  and  equal,  and  have  certain  natural, 
essential,  and  unalienable  rights,"  etc.,  by  which  declaration 
its  highest  judicial  tribunal  struck  the  shackles  at  once  from 
every  slave  in  the  Commonwealth. 

Connecticut  provided  in  1784  for  freeing  her  slaves. 

New  Hampshire  did  not  prohibit  slavery  by  express  law,  but 
all  persons  born  after  her  Constitution  of  1776  were  free;  and 
slave  importation  was  thereafter  prohibited. 

Pennsylvania,  in  1780,  by  law  provided  for  the  gradual 
emancipation  of  slaves  within  her  territory.  To  her  German 
population  and  the  Society  of  Friends  the  credit  is  mainly  due 
for  this  act  of  justice.  This  Society  had  theretofore  (1774) 
disowned,  in  its  "  yearly  Meeting,"  all  its  members  who 
trafficked  in  slaves;  and  later  (1776)  it  resolved: 

"  That  the  owners  of  slaves,  who  refused  to  execute  proper  in 
struments  for  giving  them  their  freedom,  were  to  be  disowned 
likewise." 

New  York  adopted  gradual  emancipation  in  1799,  but  final 
emancipation  did  not  come  until  1827. 

Rhode  Island,  in  the  first  year  of  the  First  Continental 
Congress  (1774),  enacted: 


Constitution  of  the  United  States  31 

"  That  for  the  future  no  negro  or  mulatto  slave  shall  be  brought 
into  the  colony  .  .  .  and  that  all  previously  enslaved  persons 
on  becoming  residents  of  Rhode  Island  should  obtain  their  freedom. ' ' 

New  Jersey  in  17/8,  through  Governor  Livingstone,  made 
an  attempt  at  emancipation  which  failed  ;  it  was  not  until  1804 
that  she  prohibited  slavery  in  what  proved  a  qualified  way, 
and  it  seems  she  held  slaves  at  each  census,  including  that  of 
1860,  and  possibly  in  some  form  human  slavery  was  abolished 
there  by  the  Thirteenth  Amendment  to  the  Constitution. 

The  census  of  1790  showed  slaves  in  all  the  original  States 
save  Massachusetts  alone;  Vermont  was  admitted  into  the 
Union  in  1790;  her  Constitution  prohibited  slavery,  but  she 
returned  at  that  census  seventeen  slaves. 

The  first  census  under  the  Constitution,  however,  showed, 
in  the  Northern  States,  40,370  slaves,  and  in  the  Southern 
States,  657,527;  there  being  in  Virginia  alone  293,427,  nearly 
one  half  of  all. 

The  Convention  closed  its  work  September  17,  1787,  and 
on  the  same  date  George  Washington,  its  President,  by  letter 
submitted  the  "  Constitution  to  the  consideration  of  the  United 
States  in  Congress  assembled,"  saying: 

"  It  is  obviously  impracticable  in  the  Federal  Government  of  these 
States  to  secure  all  rights  of  independent  sovereignty  to  each  and 
yet  provide  for  the  interest  and  safety  of  all.  ...  In  all  our 
deliberations  on  this  subject  we  kept  steadily  in  our  view  that  which 
appears  to  us  the  greatest  interest  of  every  true  American,  the  con 
solidation  of  our  Union,  in  which  is  involved  our  prosperity,  felicity, 
safety;  perhaps  our  national  existence." 

This  Constitution  by  its  preamble  showed  it  was,  in  many 
things,  to  supersede  and  become  paramount  to  State  authority. 
It  was  to  become  a  charter  of  freedom  for  the  people  collec 
tively,  and  in  some  sense  individually.  Its  preamble  runs 
thus: 

"  We,  fat  people  of  the  United  States,  in  order  to  form  a  more  per 
fect  union,  establish  justice,  insure  domestic  tranquillity,  provide  for 


32  Political  History  of  Slavery 

the  common  defence,  promote  the  general  welfare,  and  secure  the 
blessings  of  liberty  to  ourselves  and  our  posterity,  do  ordain  and 
establish  this  Constitution  for  the  United  States  of  America." 

Nine  States  were,  by  its  seventh  article,  necessary  to  ratify 
it  before  it  went  into  effect. 

The  ratification  of  the  Constitution,  on  various  grounds,  was 
fiercely  opposed  by  many  patriotic  men,  Patrick  Henry  among 
the  number.  Some  thought  it  did  not  contain  sufficient  guar 
antees  for  individual  freedom,  others  that  private  rights  of  prop 
erty  were  not  adequately  secured,  and  still  others  that  States 
were  curtailed  or  abridged  of  their  governmental  authority 
and  too  much  power  was  taken  from  the  people  and  centered 
in  the  Federal  Government.  Mason,  of  Virginia,  a  member 
of  the  Convention  that  framed  it,  led  a  party  who  opposed  it 
on  the  ground,  among  others,  that  it  authorized  Congress  to 
levy  duties  on  imports  and  to  thus  encourage  home  industries 
and  manufactories,  promotive  of  free  labor,  inimical  and  dan 
gerous  to  human  slavery.  The  best  efforts  and  influence  of 
Washington  and  the  other  friends  of  the  Constitution  would 
not  have  been  sufficient  to  secure  its  ratification  had  they  not 
placated  many  of  its  enemies  by  promising  to  adopt,  promptly 
on  its  going  into  effect,  the  amendments  numbered  one  to  ten 
inclusive.  (The  First  Congress,  September  25,  1789,  submit 
ted  those  ten  amendments  according  to  the  agreement,  and 
they  were  shortly  thereafter  ratified  and  became  a  part  of  the 
Constitution.) 

By  a  resolution  of  the  Old  Congress,  of  September  13,  1788, 
March  4,  1789,  was  fixed  as  the  time  for  commencing  proceed 
ings  under  the  Constitution.  At  the  date  of  this  resolution 
eleven  of  the  thirteen  States  had  ratified  it.  North  Carolina 
ratified  it  November  21,  1789,  and  Rhode  Island,  the  last,  on 
May  29,  1790. 

Vermont,  not  of  the  original  thirteen  States,  ratified  the 
Constitution  January  10,  1791,  over  a  month  prior  to  her  ad 
mission  into  the  Union.  This  latter  event  occurred  February 
18,  1791. 


Constitution  of  the  United  States  33 

Thus  fourteen  States  became,  almost  at  the  same  time, 
members  of  the  Union  under  the  Constitution,  and  each  and 
all  of  which  then  held  or  had  theretofore  held  slaves. 

Notwithstanding  all  this,  there  were  many  of  the  framers  of 
the  Constitution  and  its  warmest  friends  who  sincerely  desired 
to  provide  for  the  early  abolition  of  slavery,  some  by  gradual 
emancipation,  others  by  heroic  measures;  and  there  were  many 
from  the  South  who  favored  emancipation,  while  by  no  means 
all  the  leading  and  influential  citizens  of  the  Northern  States 
desired  it. 

It  may,  however,  be  assumed,  in  the  light  of  authentic  his 
tory,  that  the  majority  of  the  framers  of  the  Constitution,  and 
a  majority  of  its  friends  in  the  States,  hoped  and  believed  that 
slavery  would  not  be  permanent  under  it.  In  this  belief  it 
was  framed.  Slavery  was  not  affirmatively  recognized  in  it, 
though  there  was  much  discussion  as  to  it  in  the  Constitutional 
Convention.  There  was  no  attempt  to  abolish  it;  such  an  at 
tempt  would  have  failed  in  the  Convention,  and  the  Constitu 
tion,  so  necessary  to  the  new  nation,  had  it  even  provided  for 
gradual  emancipation,  would  not  have  been  ratified  by  the 
States. 

It  can  hardly  be  said  that  the  Constitution  was  framed  on 
the  line  of  compromise  as  to  the  preservation  of  human  slavery, 
though  it  was  necessary,  in  some  occult  ways,  to  recognize  its 
existence.  This  was  in  the  nature,  however,  of  a  concession 
to  it ;  the  word  slave  or  slavery  was  not  used  in  it. 

The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  however,  early 
interpreted  the  third  clause  of  Section  IV.,  Article  2,  as  provid 
ing  for  the  return  from  one  State  to  another  of  fugitive  slaves. 
This  interpretation  has  been,  on  high  authority,  and  with  much 
reason,  in  the  light  of  history,  stoutly  denied.  The  clause 
reads : 

"  No  person  held  to  service  or  labor  in  one  State,  under  the  laws 
thereof,  escaping  into  another,  shall,  in  consequence  of  any  law  or 
regulation  therein,  be  discharged  from  such  service  or  labor,  but 
shall  be  delivered  up  on  claim  of  the  party  to  whom  such  service  or 
labor  is  due." 

VOL.  I.— 3. 


34  Political  History  of  Slavery 

The  "  service  or  labor  "  here  referred  to,  it  is  claimed,  was 
that  owing  by  persons  who  were  under  indentures  of  some 
kind,  growing  out  of  contracts  for  transportation  into  the 
colonies  of  persons  from  the  Old  World,  and  possibly  growing 
out  of  other  contract  obligations  wherein  they  had  agreed,  for 
a  long  or  short  time,  to  perform  "  service  or  labor."  Many 
such  obligations  then  existed. 

Slaves  were  not  then  nor  since  regarded  by  their  owners  as 
"persons  "  merely  "  held  to  service  or  labor,"  but  they  were 
held  as  personal  chattels,  owing  no  duty  to  their  masters  dis 
tinguishable  from  that  owing  by  an  ox,  a  horse,  or  an  ass. 

But  the  supreme  judiciary  and  the  executive  and  legislative 
departments  of  the  government  came  soon  to  treat  this  as  a 
fugitive-slave  clause.  It  is  only  now  interesting  to  examine  its 
peculiar  phraseology  and  the  history  and  surrounding  circum 
stances  under  which  it  became  a  part  of  the  Constitution,  to 
demonstrate  the  great  care  and  desire  of  the  eminent  and 
liberty-loving  framers  of  the  Constitution  to  avoid  the  direct 
recognition  of  African  slavery. 

The  only  other  clause  in  which  the  adherents  of  slavery 
claimed  it  was  recognized  is  paragraph  3,  Section  2,  Article 
I.,  which  provided  that: 

"  Representation  and  direct  taxes  shall  be  apportioned  among 
the  several  States  .  .  .  according  to  their  respective  numbers, 
which  shall  be  determined  by  adding  to  the  whole  number  of  free 
persons,  including  those  bound  to  service  for  a  term  of  years,  and 
excluding  Indians  not  taxed,  three  fifths  of  all  other  persons." 

The  "  other  persons  "  referred  to  here,  if  only  slaves,  are 
very  delicately  described.  But  this  clause,  too,  came  to  be 
recognized  by  all  the  departments  of  the  government  as  refer 
ring  to  slaves.  It  is  quite  sure  that  if  the  good  and  plain  men 
of  the  Revolutionary  period  had  been  dealing  with  a  subject 
not  shocking  to  their  consciences,  sense  of  justice,  and  human 
ity,  they  would  have  dealt  with  it  in  plain  words,  of  direct  and 
not  doubtful  import. 

The  clause  of  the  Constitution  giving  representation  in  the 


Constitution  of  the  United  States  35 

House  of  Representatives  of  Congress  and  in  the  Electoral 
College  in  the  choice  of  President  and  Vice-President,  came 
soon  to  be  regarded  as  unjust  to  the  free  States.  Three  fifths 
of  all  slaves  were  counted  to  give  representation  to  free  persons 
of  the  South;  that  is,  three  fifths  of  all  slave  property  was 
counted  numerically,  and  thus,  in  many  Congressional  dis 
tricts,  the  vote  of  one  slaveholder  was  more  than  equal  to  two 
votes  in  a  free  State.  For  example,  in  1850,  the  number  of 
free  inhabitants  in  the  slave  States  was  6,412,605,  and  in  the 
free  States  13,434,686,  more  than  double.  The  representation 
in  Congress  from  the  slave  States  was  90  members,  from  the 
free  States  144.  Three  fifths  of  the  slaves  were  1,920,182, 
giving  the  South  20  (a  fraction  more)  members,  the  ratio  of 
representation  then  being  93,420.  If  the  234  representatives 
had  been  apportioned  equally,  according  to  free  inhabitants, 
the  North  would  have  had  159  and  the  South  75,  a  gain  of 
fifteen  to  the  free  and  a  loss  of  that  number  to  the  slave  States, 
a  gain  of  30  to  the  North. 

The  same  injustice  was  shown  in  levying  direct  taxes.  (All 
this,  however,  has  been  changed  by  the  Fourteenth  Amend 
ment  to  the  Constitution.) 

The  same  discriminating  language  is  used  (Sec.  9,  Art.  I.) 
when  obviously  referring  to  the  African  slave  trade.  A  strong 
sentiment  existed  in  favor  of  putting  an  end  at  once  to  the 
traffic  in  human  beings;  the  Christian  consciences  of  our  fore 
fathers  revolted  at  its  wickedness,  and  there  was  then  begin 
ning  a  general  movement  throughout  the  civilized  world 
against  it.  Some  European  countries  had  denounced  it  as 
piracy. 

It  was,  however,  profitable,  and  much  capital  was  invested 
in  it,  and  there  was  even  then  an  increased  demand  for  slaves 
in  the  cotton,  rice,  and  tobacco  States. 

It  was  feared  so  radical  a  measure  as  the  immediate  stoppage 
of  this  trade  would  endanger  the  Constitution,  and  as  to  this, 
also,  it  was  deemed  wise  to  compromise;  so  Congress  was 
prohibited  from  legislating  to  prevent  it  prior  to  the  year  1808. 
This  trade  was  not  only  then  carried  on  by  our  own  people, 


36  Political  History  of  Slavery 

but,  through  ships  of  other  countries,  slaves  were  imported 
into  the  United  States.  Each  State  was  left  free  to  prohibit 
the  importation  of  slaves  within  its  limits. 

We  have  now  referred  to  all  the  clauses  of  the  Constitution 
as  originally  adopted  relating,  by  construction  or  possibility, 
to  slavery  or  slave  labor. 

The  Republic,  under  this  great  charter,  set  out  upon  its 
career  as  a  nation,  properly  aspiring  to  become  of  the  first 
among  the  powers  of  the  earth,  and  succeeding  in  the  highest 
sense  in  this  ambition,  it  yet  remains  to  be  told  how  near  our 
Republic  came,  in  time,  to  the  brink  of  that  engulfing  chasm 
which  in  past  ages  has  swallowed  up  other  nations  for  their 
wicked  oppression  and  enslavement  of  man. 

Slavery,  thus  delicately  treated  in  our  Constitution,  brought 
that  Republic,  in  less  than  three  quarters  of  a  century,  to  the 
throes  of  death,  as  we  shall  see. 


VII 


CAUSES    OF    GROWTH    OF    SLAVERY 

It  may  be  well  here,  before  speaking  of  slavery  in  its  legis 
lative  history  under  the  Constitution,  to  refer  briefly  to  some 
of  the  more  important  causes  of  its  growth  and  extension, 
other  than  political. 

First  in  importance  was  cotton.  It  required  cheap  labor  to 
cultivate  it  with  profit,  and  even  then,  at  first,  it  was  not  profit 
able.  The  invention  by  Whitney  of  the  cotton-gin,  in  1793, 
was  the  most  important  single  invention  up  to  that  time  to 
agriculture,  if  not  the  most  important  of  any  time,  and  espe 
cially  is  this  true  as  affecting  cotton  planters. 

Cotton  was  indigenous  to  America;  the  soil  and  climate  of 
the  South  were  well  adapted  to  its  growth.  Its  culture  from 
the  seed  was  there  very  easy,  but  the  separation  of  the  seed 
from  the  fibre  was  so  slow  that  it  required  an  average  hand 
one  day  to  secure  one  pound. 


Causes  of  Growth  of  Slavery  37 

Whitney's  cotton-gin,  however,  at  once  increased  the  amount 
from  one  to  fifty  pounds. 

This  invention  came  at  a  most  opportune  time  for  slavery  in 
the  United  States,  as  the  cheapness  of  rice,  indigo,  and  other 
staples  of  the  South  was  such  as  to  prevent  their  large  and 
profitable  production  even  with  the  labor  of  slaves.  Cotton 
was  not,  in  1794,  the  date  of  Jay's  treaty  with  Great  Britain, 
known  to  him  as  an  article  of  export.  Soon,  by  the  use  of  the 
cotton-gin,  cotton  became  the  principal  article  of  export  from 
the  United  States;  cotton  plantations  rapidly  increased  in  size 
and  number,  and  their  owners  multiplied  their  slaves  and  grew 
rich.  Cotton  production  increased  from  1793  to  1860  one 
thousand  fold. 

It  is  highly  probable  that  Eli  Whitney's  cotton-gin  operated 
to  prevent  the  much-hoped-for  early  emancipation  of  slaves  in 
America,  and  that  thus  the  inventive  genius  of  man  was  instru 
mental  in  forging  the  fetters  of  man. 

Other  products,  such  as  rice  and  sugar,  were  successfully 
produced  in  the  South,  but  the  demand  for  them  was  limited 
by  competition  in  other  countries,  in  some  of  which  slave  labor 
was  employed.  The  ease  of  producing  cotton  stimulated  its 
common  use  throughout  the  world,  and  it  soon  became  a  nec 
essary  commodity  in  all  civilized  countries.  "  Cotton  is  king  " 
was  the  cry  of  the  slaveholder  and  the  exporter.  Southern 
aristocracy  rested  on  it.  In  the  more  northern  of  the  slave 
States,  where  cotton,  on  account  of  the  climate,  could  not  be 
successfully  grown,  the  breeding  of  slaves  with  which  to  supply 
the  cotton  planters  with  the  requisite  number  of  hands  became 
a  source  of  great  profit ;  and  the  slave  trade  was  revived  to  aid 
in  supplying  the  same  great  demand. 

Tobacco  and  some  of  the  cereals  were  also  produced  by 
slave  labor,  but  they  could  be  produced  by  free  labor  North  as 
well  as  South.  Of  the  above  3,000,000  slaves  in  the  United 
States  in  1850,  it  has  been  estimated  that  1,800,000  were  em 
ployed  in  the  growth  and  preservation  of  cotton  alone,  and 
its  value  that  year  was  $105,600,000,  while  the  sugar  product 
was  valued,  the  same  year,  at  only  §12,400,000,  and  rice  at 


38  Political  History  of  Slavery 

$3,000,000.  The  total  domestic  exports  for  the  year  ending 
1850  were  $137,000,000,  of  which  cotton  reached  $72,000,000, 
and  all  breadstuffs  and  provisions  only  $26,000,000.' 

VIII 

FUGITIVE    SLAVE    LAW 1793 

Contemporaneous  with  the  cotton-gin  came,  in  1793,  the  first 
fugitive-slave  law. 

The  Constitution  was  not  self-executing,  if  it  really  con 
tained,  as  we  have  seen,  a  clause  requiring  escaped  slaves  to  be 
surrendered  from  one  State  to  their  masters  in  another. 

The  Governor  of  the  State  of  Virginia  refused  the  rendition 
of  three  kidnappers  of  a  free  negro,  on  the  requisition  of  the 
Governor  of  Pennsylvania,  from  which  State  he  had  been  kid 
napped,  on  the  sole  ground  that  no  law  required  the  surrender 
of  fugitive  slaves  from  Virginia.  The  controversy  thus  arising 
was  called  to  the  attention  of  President  Washington  and  by 
him  to  Congress,  and  it  ended  by  the  passage  of  the  first 
fugitive-slave  act.  It  was  for  a  time  tolerably  satisfactory  to 
the  different  sections  of  the  country,  though  in  itself  the  most 
flagrant  attempt  to  violate  state-rights,  judged  from  the  more 
modern  secession,  state-rights  standpoint,  ever  attempted  by 
Federal  authority. 

It  required  state  magistrates,  who  owed  their  offices  solely  to 
state  law,  to  sit  in  judgment  in  fugitive-slave  cases,  and  to  aid 
in  returning  to  slavery  negroes  claimed  as  slaves  by  masters 
from  foreign  States.  The  act  provided  for  the  return  of  fugi 
tive  apprentices  as  well  as  fugitive  slaves. 

In  time  the  Northern  States  became  free,  and  the  public 
conscience  in  them  became  so  changed  that  the  magistrates 
were  deterred  or  unwilling  to  act  in  execution  of  the  law. 
Massachusetts  and  Pennsylvania  each  passed  a  law  making  it 
penal  for  any  of  their  officers  to  perform  any  duties  or  to  take 
cognizance  of  any  case  under  the  fugitive-slave  law.  Other 
States,  through  their  judiciary,  pronounced  it  unconstitutional; 

1  DeBow's  Resources,  etc.,  vol.  iii.,  p.  388. 


Slave  Trade  Abolished  39 

even  some  of  the  Federal  judges  doubted  its  consonance  with 
the  Constitution,  but,  such  as  it  was,  it  lasted  until  1850.  It 
did  not  provide  for  a  jury  trial.  The  scenes  enacted  in  its 
execution  shocked  the  moral  sense  of  mankind,  and  even  the 
slaveholder  often  shrank  from  attempting  its  execution. 

But  it  was  not  until  about  the  time  of  the  enactment  of  the 
fugitive-slave  law  of  1850  that  the  highest  excitement  pre 
vailed  in  the  North  over  its  enforcement,  and  of  this  we  shall 
speak  hereafter. 

IX 

SLAVE  TRADE:    ABOLISHED  BY  LAW 

In  the  English  Parliament,  in  1776,  the  year  of  the  Declara 
tion  of  Independence,  the  first  motion  was  made  towards  the 
abolition  of  the  slave  trade,  long  theretofore  fostered  by  Eng 
lish  kings  and  queens,  but  not  until  1807  did  the  British  moral 
sense  rise  high  enough  to  pass,  at  Lord  Granville's  instance, 
the  famous  act  for  "  the  Abolition  of  the  Slave  Trade."  As 
early  as  1794  the  United  States  prohibited  their  subjects  from 
trading  in  slaves  to  foreign  countries;  and  in  1807,  they  pro 
hibited  the  importation  of  slaves  into  any  of  the  States,  to 
take  effect  at  the  beginning  of  1808,  the  earliest  time  possible, 
as  we  have  seen,  under  the  Constitution.  But  it  was  not  until 
1820  that  slave-traders  were  declared  pirates,  punishable  as 
such. 

The  prohibition  of  the  slave  trade  by  law  did  not  effectually 
end  it,  nor  was  the  law  declaring  it  piracy  wholly  effectual, 
though  the  latter  did  much,  through  the  co-operation  of  other 
nations,  to  restrict  it. 

There  were  active  movements  in  1852  and  1858,  in  the 
South,  to  revive  the  African  slave  trade,  and  especially  was 
there  fierce  opposition  to  the  "  piracy  act."  Jefferson  Davis, 
at  a  convention  in  Mississippi,  July,  1858,  advocated  the 
repeal  of  the  latter  act,  but  doubted  the  practicability  then  of 
abrogating  the  law  prohibiting  slave  traffic.1 

1  Rhode's  Hist.  United  States,  vol.  ii.,  p.  372. 


40  Political  History  of  Slavery 

It  is  worthy  of  mention  here  that  April  2Oth,  eight  days  after 
Sumter  was  fired  upon,  Commander  Alfred  Taylor,  command 
ing  the  United  States  naval  ship  Saratoga,  in  the  port  of 
Kabenda,  Africa,  captured  the  Niglitingale  of  Boston,  flying 
American  colors,  with  a  cargo  of  961  recently  captured,  stolen, 
or  purchased  African  negroes,  destined  to  be  carried  to  some 
American  port  and  there  sold  into  slavery.  This  human  cargo 
was  sent  to  the  humane  Rev.  John  Seys,  at  Monrovia,  Liberia, 
to  be  provided  for.  One  hundred  and  sixty  died  on  a  four 
teen  days'  sea- voyage,  from  ship-fever  and  confinement,  though 
the  utmost  care  was  taken  by  Lieutenant  Guthrie  and  the  crew 
of  the  slaver  for  their  comfort.1 

The  laws  abolishing  the  foreign  slave  trade  and  prohibiting 
the  introduction  of  African  slaves  (after  1807)  into  the  United 
States  even  helped  to  rivet  slavery  more  firmly  therein.  They 
more  than  doubled  the  value  of  a  slave,  and,  therefore,  incited 
slave-breeding  to  supply  the  increasing  demand  in  the  cotton 
States,  and  in  time  this  proved  so  profitable  that  the  South 
sought  new  territory  whence  slavery  could  be  extended,  and 
out  of  which  slave  States  could  be  formed. 

The  "  Declaration  against  the  Slave  Trade"  of  the  world, 
signed  by  the  representatives  of  the  "  Powers  "  at  the  Congress 
of  Vienna,  in  1815,  and  repeated  at  the  Congress  of  Paris  at 
the  end  of  the  Napoleonic  wars,  was  potential  enough  to  abate 
but  not  to  end  this  most  inhuman  and  sinful  trade.2 

Even  as  late  as  1816,  English  merchants,  supported  by 
the  corporations  of  London  and  Liverpool,  through  mercantile 
jealousy,  and  pretending  to  believe  that  the  very  existence  of 
commerce  on  the  seas  and  their  own  existence  depended  on  the 
continuance  of  the  slave  trade,  not  only  opposed  the  abolition 
of  the  black  slave  traffic,  but  they  opposed  the  abolition  of 
white  slavery  in  Algiers.3 

1  Official  Records,  etc.,  Navies  of  the  War  of  the  Rebellion,  vol.  i.,  p.  n. 

-  It  stands  to  the  eternal  credit  of  Napoleon  that  on  his  return  from  Elba  to 
Paris  (1815)  he  decreed  for  France  the  total  abolition  of  the  slave-trade.  This 
decree  was  confirmed  by  the  Bourbon  dynasty  in  1818.  Suppression  of  African 
Slave  Trade  U.  S.  (DuBois),  p.  247. 

3  Osier's  Life  of  Exmo^^th,  p.  303  ;   Slavery,  Letters,  etc.,  Horace  Mann,  p.  276. 


Slave  Trade  Abolished  41 

This  nefarious  traffic  did  not  cease  in  the  United  States, 
although  at  the  Treaty  of  Ghent  (1815)  it  was  declared  that: 
"  Whereas  the  traffic  in  slaves  is  irreconcilable  with  the  prin 
ciples  of  humanity  and  justice,"  and  the  two  countries  (Great 
Britain  and  the  United  States)  therein  stipulated  to  use  their 
best  endeavors  to  abolish  it. 

The  revival  of  the  slave  trade  was  openly  advocated  by  lead 
ing  Southern  politicians,  and  the  illicit  traffic  greatly  increased 
immediately  after  the  admission  into  the  Union  of  Texas  as  a 
State  and  the  aggressions  on  Mexico  for  more  slave  territory, 
and  especially  just  after  the  discussions  over  the  Compromise 
measures  of  1850  and  the  Nebraska  Act  of  1854,  followed  by 
the  Dred  Scott  decision  in  1857.  It  was  principally  carried 
on  under  the  United  States  flag,  the  ships  carrying  it  denying 
the  right  of  search  to  foreign  vessels  engaged  in  suppressing 
the  trade.  British  officials  claimed  in  June,  1850,  "  that  at 
least  one  half  of  the  successful  part  of  the  slave  trade  was  car 
ried  on  under  the  American  flag."  The  fitting  out  of  slavers 
centred  at  New  York  City ;  Boston  and  New  Orleans  being 
good  seconds.  Twenty-one  of  twenty-two  slavers  taken  by 
British  cruisers  in  1857-58  were  from  New  York,  Boston,  and 
New  Orleans. 

'  During  eighteen  months  of  the  years  1859-60  eighty-five 
slavers  are  reported  to  have  fitted  out  in  New  York  harbor, 
and  these  alone  transported  from  30,000  to  60,000  slaves 
annually  to  America." 

The  greed  of  man  for  gain  has  smothered  and  will  ever 
smother  the  human  conscience.  The  slave  trade,  under  the 
denunciation  of  piracy,  still  exists,  and  will  exist  until  African 
slavery  ceases  throughout  the  world.  So  long  as  there  is  a 
demand,  at  good  prices,  this  wicked  traffic  will  go  on,  and  in 
the  jungles  of  Africa  there  will  be  found  stealers  of  human 
beings. 

1  Sup.  of  African  Slave  Trade  (DuBois)  pp.  135,  178-9. 


42  Political  History  of  Slavery 


LOUISIANA    PURCHASE 

In  1803,  Napoleon,  fearing  that  he  could  not  hold  his  dis 
tant  American  possessions,  known  as  the  Louisiana  Province, 
acquired  from  Spain,  and  which  by  treaty  was  to  be  re-ceded 
to  Spain  and  not  disposed  of  to  any  other  nation,  put  aside  all 
scruples  and  good  faith,  and  for  60,000,000  francs,  on  April 
3Oth  signed  a  treaty  of  cession  of  the  vast  territory,  then 
mostly  uninhabited,  to  the  United  States.  This  was  in  Jeffer 
son's  administration. 

The  United  States  bought  this  domain  and  its  people  just  as 
they  might  buy  unoccupied  lands  with  animals  on  it. 

It  was  early  claimed  as  slave  territory.  There  were  only  a 
few  slaves  within  its  limits  when  purchased,  though  slavery 
was  recognized  there.  This  purchase  was  a  most  important 
one,  although  at  the  time  it  was  not  so  regarded. 

The  Louisiana  Purchase  was  much  greater,  territorially 
speaking,  than  all  the  States  then  in  the  Union,  with  all  its 
other  possessions.1 

It  comprised  what  are  now  the  States  of  Louisiana,  Arkan 
sas,  Missouri,  Iowa,  Nebraska,  North  Dakota,  South  Dakota, 
nearly  all  of  Kansas,  Minnesota,  Montana,  Wyoming,  large 
parts  of  Colorado  and  the  Indian  Territory,  and  a  portion 
of  Idaho.  These  States  and  Territories  in  1890  contained 
11,804,101  inhabitants. 

At  the  time  of  this  great  acquisition  a  conviction  prevailed 
that  slavery  was  rapidly  diminishing.  Adams  and  Jefferson, 
each,  while  President,  entertained  the  belief  that  slavery 
would,  ere  long,  come  to  a  peaceful  end.  It  might  then  have 
been  possible,  by  law  of  Congress,  to  devote  this  new  region 
to  freedom,  but,  as  slavery  existed  at  and  around  New  Orleans 
in  1812  when  the  State  of  Louisiana  was  admitted  into  the 

1  For  map  showing  territory  acquired  by  the  U.  S.,  by  each  treaty,  etc.,  see 
History  Ready  Ref.,  vol.  v.,  p.  3286,  and  Louisiana  Purchase  (Hermann,  Com. 
Gen.  Land  Office).  The  original  thirteen  States  and  Territories  comprised  827,844 
sq.  m.  The  Louisiana  Purchase,  1,171,931  sq.  m. 


Louisiana  Purchase  43 

Union,  it  became  a  slave  State.  This  fate  was  largely  due  to 
the  claim  of  its  original  inhabitants  that  they  were  secured  the 
right  to  hold  slaves  by  the  treaty  of  cession  from  France. 

Later  on,  the  provision  of  this  treaty,  under  which  it  was 
claimed  slavery  was  perpetuated,  was  a  subject  of  much  dis 
cussion,  and  on  it  was  founded  the  most  absurd  arguments  on 
behalf  of  the  slave  power. 

Its  third  article  was  the  sole  one  referred  to  as  fastening 
forever  the  institution  of  slavery  on  the  inhabitants  of  this 
vast  empire.  There  are  those  yet  living  who  deny  that,  even 
under  the  present  Constitution  of  the  United  States  or  the 
constitutions  of  the  States  since  erected  therein,  slavery  is 
lawfully  excluded  therefrom. 

This  article  reads : 

'  The  inhabitants  of  the  ceded  territory  shall  be  incorporated  in 
the  Union  of  the  United  States,  and  admitted  as  soon  as  possible, 
according  to  the  principles  of  the  Federal  Constitution,  to  the  en 
joyment  of  all  the  rights,  advantages,  and  immunities  of  citizens  of 
the  United  States;  and  in  the  meantime  they  shall  be  maintained 
and  protected  in  the  enjoyment  of  their  liberty,  property,  and  the 
religion  they  profess." 

Justice  Catron,  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court,  speak 
ing  in  the  Dred  Scott  case,  for  the  majority  of  the  court  and 
of  this  article,  says : 

"  Louisiana  was  a  province  where  slavery  was  not  only  lawful, 
but  where  property  in  slaves  was  the  most  valuable  of  all  personal 
property.  The  province  was  ceded  as  a  unit,  with  an  equal  right 
pertaining  to  all  its  inhabitants,  in  every  part  thereof,  to  own  slaves." 

He  and  others  of  the  concurring  justices  held  that  the  in 
habitants  at  the  time  of  the  purchase,  also  all  immigrants  after 
the  cession,  were  protected  in  the  right  to  hold  slaves  in  the 
entire  purchase. 

Near  the  close  of  his  opinion,  still  speaking  of  this  article 
and  the  acquired  territory,  he  says: 

:'  The  right  of  the  United  States  in  or  over  it  depends  on  the 


44  Political  History  of  Slavery 

contract  of  cession,  which  operates  to  incorporate  as  well  the  Terri 
tory  as  its  inhabitants  into  the  Union. 

"  My  opinion  is  that  the  third  article  of  the  treaty  of  1803,  ceding 
Louisiana  to  the  United  States,  stands  protected  by  the  Constitution, 
and  cannot  be  repealed  by  Congress." 

This  view  was  heroically  combatted  by  a  minority  of  the 
court,  especially  by  Justices  McLean  and  Curtis.  The  latter, 
in  his  opinion,  said 

'  That  a  treaty  with  a  foreign  nation  cannot  deprive  Congress  of 
any  part  of  its  legislative  power  conferred  by  the  people,  so  that  it 
no  longer  can  legislate  as  it  is  empowered  by  the  Constitution." 

Also,  that  if  the  treaty  expressly  prohibited  (as  it  did  not) 
the  exclusion  of  slavery  from  the  ceded  territory  the  "  court 
could  not  declare  that  an  act  of  Congress  excluding  it  was 
void  by  force  of  the  treaty.  ...  A  refusal  to  execute 
such  a  stipulation  would  not  be  a  judicial,  but  a  political  and 
legislative  question.  ...  It  would  belong  to  diplomacy 
and  legislation,  and  not  to  the  administration  of  existing 
laws."  1 

Plainly  no  part  of  the  treaty  of  cession  fastened  slavery,  or 
any  other  institution  of  France,  on  the  territory  ceded  to  the 
United  States.  If  its  provisions  were  violated  by  the  United 
States,  France,  internationally,  or  the  inhabitants  at  the  date 
of  the  treaty,  might  have  complained  and  had  redress.  Ob 
viously  the  treaty  had  no  bearing  on  the  question  of  slavery  in 
the  United  States,  but  its  provisions  were  seized  upon,  as  was 
every  possible  pretext,  by  the  votaries  of  slavery  to  maintain 
and  extend  it. 

It  was  also,  by  a  majority  of  the  court,  held  in  this  memor 
able  case  (hereafter  to  be  mentioned)  that  under  the  third 
article  of  the  cession  slaves  could  be  taken  from  any  State 
into  any  part  of  the  Louisiana  Purchase  during  its  terri 
torial  state,  and  there  held,  and  hence  that  the  Missouri  Com 
promise,  of  1820,  forbidding  slavery  in  the  territory  north  of 

1  Dred  Scott  Case,  19  Howard,  393,  etc. 


Florida  45 

36°  30',  was  in  violation  of  the  treaty  and  was  unconstitutional, 
as  were  all  other  acts  of  Congress  excluding  slavery  from 
United  States  territory.  This  was  in  the  heydey  (1857)  °f 
the  slave  power,  and  when  it  aspired,  practically,  to  make 
slavery  national. 

This  aggressive  policy,  as  we  shall  see  when  we  come  to  con 
sider  the  Nebraska  Act  of  1854  relating  to  a  principal  part  of 
the  Louisiana  Purchase,  led  to  a  great  uprising  of  the  friends 
of  freedom,  the  political  overthrow  of  the  advocates  of  slavery 
in  most  branches  of  the  Union;  then  to  secession;  then  to 
war,  whence  came,  with  peace,  universal  freedom,  and  slavery 
in  the  Republic  forever  dead. 

XI 

FLORIDA 

Florida  did  not  become  a  slave  colony  even  on  being  taken 
possession  of  by  the  English  in  1763,  nor  on  its  re-conquest  by 
Spain  in  1781. 

By  the  treaty  of  peace  at  the  end  of  the  war  of  the  Revolu 
tion  (1783)  Great  Britain  recognized  as  part  of  the  southern 
boundary  of  the  United  States  a  line  due  east  from  the  Missis 
sippi  at  31°  of  latitude;  and  at  the  same  time,  by  a  sepa 
rate  treaty,  she  ceded  to  Spain  the  then  two  Floridas.  Florida 
became  a  refuge  for  fugitive  slaves  from  Georgia  and  South 
Carolina. 

"  Georgians  could  never  forget  that  the  fugitive  slaves  were  roam 
ing  about  the  Everglades  of  Florida. ' '  1 

The  Seminole  Indians  welcomed  to  their  wild  freedom  the 
escaped  negro  from  the  lash  of  the  overseer,  and  consequently 
the  long  and  bloody  Florida  Indian  wars  were  literally  a  slave 
hunt.  The  wild  tribes  of  Indians  knew  no  fugitive-slave  law. 

In  the  War  of  1812,  Spain  permitted  the  English  to  occupy, 
for  their  purposes,  some  points  in  Florida.  When  the  war 

1  W.  G.  Summer's  Andrew  Jackson,  ch.  iii. 


46  Political  History  of  Slavery 

ended  they  abandoned  a  fort  on  the  Appalachicola,  about 
fifteen  miles  above  its  mouth,  with  a  large  amount  of  arms  and 
ammunition.  This  fort  the  fugitive  negroes  seized  and  held 
for  about  three  years  as  a  refuge  for  escaped  slaves,  and,  conse 
quently,  a  menace  to  slavery.  It  was  during  this  time  called 
"  Negro  Fort."  At  the  instigation  of  slave  owners,  it  was 
attacked  by  General  Gaines  of  the  United  States  Army. 

"  A  hot  shot  penetrated  one  of  the  magazines,  and  the  whole  fort 
was  blown  to  pieces,  July  27,  1816.  There  were  300  negro  men, 
women,  and  children,  and  20  Choctaws  in  the  fort  ;  270  were  killed. 
Only  three  came  out  unhurt,  and  these  wrere  killed  by  the  allied 
Indians." 

Thus  slavery  established  and  maintained  itself,  through  in 
dividual  and  national  crime  and  blood,  until  the  day  when 
God's  retributive  justice  should  come.  And  we  shall  see  how 
thoroughly  His  justice  was  meted  out;  how  "  an  eye  for  an 
eye,  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth,"  measure  of  blood  for  measure 
of  blood,  anguish  for  anguish,  came  to  the  dominating  white 
race! 

It  was  not  until  February,  1821,  that  notice  of  the  ratifica 
tion  of  a  treaty,  made  two  years  before,  was  received,  by  which 
Spain  ceded  Florida  to  the  United  States  in  consideration  of 
their  paying  $5,000,000  in  satisfaction  of  American  claims 
against  Spain. 

This  was  not  all  the  Republic  paid  for  Florida.  A  second 
Seminole  war  (1835-43)  ensued,  the  bloodiest  and  most  costly 
of  all  our  Indian  wars,  in  which  the  Indians  were  assisted  by 
fugitive  slaves  and  their  descendants,  in  whom  the  negro  blood 
was  admixed,  often  with  the  white  blood  of  former  masters, 
and  again  with  the  Indian.1 

At  the  end  of  eight  years,  after  many  valuable  lives  were 

1  In  1821  at  Indian  Springs,  Florida,  a  forced  treaty  was  negotiated  with  the 
Creek  Indians  for  part  of  their  lands  by  which  the  United  States  agreed  to  apply 
$109,000  of  the  purchase  price  as  compensation  to  Georgia  claimants  for  escaped 
slaves,  and  $141,000  for  "  the  offsprings  which  the  females  would  have  borne  to 
their  masters  had  they  remained  in  bondage'' — Rise  and  Fall  of  Slavery  (Wilson), 
vol.  i.,  132,  454. 


Florida  47 

lost,  and  $30,000,000  had  been  expended,  but  not  until  after 
the  great  Seminole  leader  (Osceola  ')  had  been,  by  deliberate 
treachery  and  bad  faith,  captured,  and  the  Indians  had  been 
worn  out  rather  than  conquered,  Florida  became  an  American 
province,  and  two  years  thereafter  (1845)  a  slave  State  in  the 
Union. 

The  extinction  of  the  brave  Seminole  Indians  left  no  race- 
friend  of  the  poor  enslaved  negro.  Untutored  as  they  were, 
they  knew  what  freedom  was,  and,  until  1861,  they  were  the 
only  people  on  the  American  continent  to  furnish  an  asylum 
and  to  shed  their  blood  for  the  wronged  African. 

Florida,  as  a  slave  State,  was  a  factor  in  establishing  a  bal 
ance  of  power,  politically,  between  the  North  and  South. 

As  the  war  between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain 
(1812-15)  did  not  grow  out  of  slavery,  nor  was  it  waged  to 
acquire  more  slave  territory,  nor  did  it  directly  tend  to  per 
petuate  slavery  where  established,  we  pass  it  over. 

1  Osceola,  or  As-Se-He-Ho-Lar  (black  drink),  was  the  son  of  Wm.  Powell,  an 
English  Indian-trader,  born  in  Georgia,  1804,  of  a  daughter  of  a  Seminole  chief. 
His  mother  took  him  early  to  Florida.  He  rose  rapidly  to  be  head  war-chief, 
and  married  a  daughter  of  a  fugitive  slave  who  was  treacherously  stolen  from  him, 
as  a  slave,  while  he  was  on  a  visit  to  Fort  King.  When  he  demanded  of  General 
Thompson,  the  Indian  agent,  her  release,  he  was  put  in  irons,  but  released  after 
six  days.  A  little  later,  December,  1835,  he  avenged  himself  by  killing  Thomp 
son  and  four  others  outside  of  the  fort,  thus  inaugurating  the  second  Seminole 
war.  He  hated  the  white  race,  and  his  ambition  was  to  furnish  a  safe  asylum  for 
fugitive  slaves. 

Surprises  and  massacres  ensued  for  two  years,  Osceola  showing  great  bravery 
and  skill,  and  not  excelling  his  white  adversaries  in  treachery.  He  fought  Gen 
erals  Clinch,  Gaines,  Taylor  and  Jesup,  of  the  U.  S.  A.  Jesup  induced  him 
(Oct.  21,  1837)  under  a  flag  of  truce  to  hold  a  parley  near  St.  Augustine,  where 
Jesup  treacherously  caused  him  to  be  seized,  and  the  U.  S.  authorities  (treating 
him  as  England  treated  Napoleon)  immured  him  in  captivity  for  life,  hopelessly, 
at  Fort  Moultrie.  His  free  spirit  could  not  endure  this,  and  he  died  of  a  broken 
heart  three  months  later  (January  30,  1838),  at  thirty-four  years  of  age.  His 
body  lies  buried  on  Sullivan's  Island,  afterwards  the  scene  of  a  larger  struggle  for 
human  freedom. 

The  remains  of  the  civilized  statesman-champion  of  perpetual  human  slavery, 
Calhoun,  and  the  remains  of  the  savage,  untutored  Seminole  Chief,  Osceola,  the 
champion  of  human  liberty,  lie  buried  near  Charleston,  S.  C.  Let  the  ages  judge 
each — kindly  ! 


48  Political  History  of  Slavery 

XII 

MISSOURI    COMPROMISE l82O 

In  pursuance  of  the  policy  of  trying  to  balance,  politically, 
freedom  and  slavery,  and  to  deal  tenderly  with  the  latter,  and 
not  offend  its  champions,  new  States  were  admitted  into  the 
Union,  in  pairs,  one  free  and  one  slave. 

Thus  Vermont  and  Kentucky,  Tennessee  and  Ohio,  Louis 
iana  and  Indiana,  Mississippi  and  Illinois  were  coupled,  pre 
serving  in  the  Senate  an  exact  balance  of  power.1 

When  Missouri  had  framed  a  Constitution  (1819)  and  applied 
for  admission  into  the  Union,  Alabama  was  on  the  point  of 
admission  as  a  slave  State,  and  was  admitted  the  same  year, 
and  thus  the  usage  required  the  admission  of  Missouri  as  a 
free  State.  In  1790  the  two  sections  were  nearly  equal  in 
population,  but  in  1820  the  North  had  nearly  700,000  more 
inhabitants  than  the  South. 

Missouri  was  a  part  of  the  Louisiana  Purchase,  and  she  had 
in  1820  above  10,000  slaves. 

The  usual  form  of  a  bill  was  prepared  admitting  her,  with 
slavery,  on  an  equal  footing  with  other  States.  It  came  up 
for  consideration  in  the  House  during  the  session  of  1818-1819, 
and  Mr.  Tallmadge,  of  New  York,  precipitated  a  controversy, 
which  was  participated  in  by  all  the  great  statesmen,  North 
and  South,  who  were  then  on  the  political  stage. 

He  offered  to  amend  the  bill  so  as  to  prohibit  the  further 
introduction  of  slaves  into  Missouri,  and  providing  that  all 
children  born  in  the  State  after  its  admission  should  be  free  at 
twenty-five  years  of  age. 

This  amendment  was  a  signal  for  the  fiercest  opposition. 
Clay  and  Webster,  Wm.  Pinckney  of  Maryland,  and  Rufus 
King  of  New  York,  John  Randolph  of  Roanoke,  Fisher  Ames, 
and  others,  who  were  in  the  early  prime  of  their  manhood, 
were  heard  in  the  fray.  In  it  the  first  real  threats  of  disunion, 

1  Later,  Arkansas  and  Michigan  (1836-7),  Florida  and  Iowa  (March  3,  1845), 
and  Maine  and  Missouri  were,  in  pairs — slave  and  free — admitted  as  States. 


Missouri  Compromise  49 

if  slavery  were  interfered  with,  were  heard.  It  is  more  than 
possible  those  threats  pierced  the  ears  of  John  Adams  and 
Thomas  Jefterson,  who  still  survived,1  and  caused  them  to 
despair  of  the  Republic. 

It  is  worthy  of  note  that  none  of  the  great  statesmen  engaged 
in  this  first  memorable  combat  in  which  the  Union  was  threat 
ened  in  slavery's  cause,  lived  to  confront  disunion  in  fact,  face 
to  face. 

Clay,  then  Speaker  of  the  House,  and  possessed  of  great  in 
fluence,  spoke  first  in  opposition  to  the  amendment.  Though 
his  speech,  like  others  of  that  time,  was  not  reported,  we  know 
he  denied  the  power  of  Congress  to  impose  conditions  upon  a 
new  State  after  its  admission  into  the  Union.  He  maintained 
the  sovereign  right  of  each  State  to  be  slave  or  free.  He  did 
not  profess  to  be  an  advocate  of  slavery.  He,  however, 
vehemently  asserted  that  a  restriction  of  slavery  was  cruel  to 
the  slaves  already  held.  While  their  numbers  would  be  the 
same,  it  would  so  crowd  them  in  narrow  limits  as  to  expose 
them  "  in  the  old,  exhausted  States  to  destitution,  and  even 
to  lean  and  haggard  starvation,  instead  of  allowing  them  to 
share  the  fat  plenty  of  the  new  West."  2  (What  an  argument 
in  favor  of  perpetuating  an  immoral  thing  !  So  spread  it  over 
the  world  as  to  make  it  thin,  yet  fatten  it  !) 

Clay's  arguments  were  the  most  specious  and  weighty  of 
those  made  against  the  amendment.  And  they  did  not  fail 
to  claim  the  amendment  was  in  violation  of  the  third  article 
of  the  cession  of  Louisiana,  already,  in  another  connection, 
referred  to. 

The  Missouri  delegate  denounced  the  amendment  as  a 
shameful  discrimination  against  Missouri  and  slavery,  which 
would  endanger  the  Union  ;  in  this  latter  cry  a  member  from 
Georgia  joined. 

The  friends  of  the  amendment  fearlessly  answered  Clay's 
speech  and  the  speeches  of  others.  The  House  was  reminded 
that  the  great  Ordinance  of  1787,  passed  contemporaneous 
with  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution,  and  approved  and 


died  July  4,  1826.  2  Hildreth,  vol.  vi.,  p.  664. 

VOL.  I.  —4. 


50  Political  History  of  Slavery 

enforced  by  its  framers  (some  of  whom  were  also  then  members 
of  the  Continental  Congress)  imposed  an  absolute  inhibition  on 
slavery  forever,  precedent  to  the  admission  of  Ohio,  Indiana, 
Illinois,  and  the  other  States  to  be  formed  from  the  Northwest 
Territory ;  they  showed  the  treaty  with  France  did  not  profess 
to  perpetuate  slavery  in  the  ceded  Territory;  they  denounced 
slavery  as  an  evil,  unnatural,  cruel,  opposed  to  the  principles 
of  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and  that  it  had  only  been 
tolerated,  not  approved,  by  the  Constitution;  and  Mr.  Tall- 
madge  closed  the  debate  by  characterizing  slavery  as  a 

scourge  of  the  human  race,"  certain  to  bring  on  *'  dire 
calamities  to  the  human  race";  ending  by  boldly  defying 
those  who  threatened,  if  slavery  were  restricted,  to  dissolve 
the  Union  of  the  States.  This  amendment  passed  the  House, 
87  to  76,  but  was  beaten,  the  same  session,  in  the  Senate,  22 
to  16;  one  Senator  from  Massachusetts,  one  from  Pennsyl 
vania,  and  two  from  Illinois  voted  with  the  South.  Again 
the  too  often  easily  frightened  Northern  statesmen  struck 
their  colors  just  when  the  battle  was  won. 

In  January  (1820)  of  the  succeeding  Congress  the  measure 
was  again  under  consideration  in  the  Senate,  then  composed 
of  only  forty-four  members.  It  was  then  that  Rufus  King  and 
Wm.  Pinckney,  the  former  for,  the  latter  against,  the  slavery 
restriction  amendment,  displayed  their  eloquence.  Pinckney, 
a  lawyer  of  much  general  learning,  paraphrased  a  passage  of 
Burke  to  the  effect  that  "  the  spirit  of  liberty  was  more  high 
and  haughty  in  the  slaveholding  colonies  than  in  those  to  the 
northward."  He  also  planted  himself,  with  others  from  the 
South,  on  state-sovereignty,  afterwards  more  commonly  called 
"  state-rights,"  and  in  time  tortured  into  a  doctrine  which  led 
to  nullification — Secession — War. 

All  these  speeches  were  answered  in  both  Houses  by  able 
opponents  of  slavery  extension,  but  meantime  a  matter  arose 
which  did  much  to  favor  the  admission  of  Missouri  as  a  slave 
State. 

Maine,  but  recently  separated  from  Massachusetts,  applied 
for  statehood,  and  could  not  be  refused. 


Nullification  and  Slavery  Agitation         51 

A  Senator  from  Illinois  (Mr.  Thomas)  introduced  a  proviso 
which  prohibited  slavery  north  of  36°  30'  in  the  Louisiana 
acquisition,  except  in  Missouri. 

Here,  again,  at  the  expense  of  freedom,  was  an  opportunity 
for  compromise.  It  was  promptly  seized  upon.  It  was  agreed 
that  Maine,  where  by  no  possibility  slavery  would  or  could  go, 
should  come  into  the  Union  as  a  free  State ;  Missouri  as  a  slave 
State,  and  the  proviso  limiting  slavery  in  the  remaining  terri 
tory  south  of  36°  30'  should  be  adopted.  This  compromise 
was  accepted  by  the  Senate,  and  later,  after  close  votes  on 
amendments,  the  House  also  agreed  to  it.  John  Randolph 
and  thirty-seven  Southern  members  voted  against  it,  and,  but 
for  weak-kneed  Northern  members,  it  would  have  failed.  This 
compromise  Randolph  said  was  a  "  dirty  bargain"  and  the 
Northern  members  who  supported  it  he  denounced  as  "dough 
faces," — a  coined  phrase  still  known  to  our  political  vocabulary. 

Missouri,  however,  did  not  become  a  State  until  August, 
1821.  Thus,  for  the  time  only  was  this  question  settled. 

Of  it  Jefferson  wrote,  as  if  in  prophecy: 

4  This  momentous  question,  like  a  fire  bell  in  the  night,  awakened 
and  filled  me  with  terror.  I  considered  it  the  knell  of  the  Union."  1 

Clay  wrote  of  the  height  to  which  the  heated  debate  arose  : 

"  The  words  civil  war  and  disunion  are  uttered  almost  without 
emotion."  a 

XIII 

NULLIFICATION 1832-3  (1835) 

A  debate  arose  in  the  United  States  Senate  over  a  resolution 
of  Senator  Foote  of  Connecticut  proposing  to  limit  the  sale  of 
the  public  lands,  which  took  a  wide  range.  Hayne  of  South 
Carolina  elaborately  set  forth  the  doctrine  of  nullification, 
claiming  it  inhered  in  each  State  under  the  Constitution.  He 
boldly  announced  that  the  Union  formed  was  only  a  league  or 

1  Jefferson's  Works,  vol.  vii.,  p.  159.  2 Clay's  Priv.  Cor.,  p.  6l. 


5 2  Political  History  of  Slavery 

a  compact.  This  called  forth  from  Webster  his  celebrated 
"  Reply  to  Hayne,"  of  January  26,  1830,  in  which  he  assailed 
and  apparently  overthrew  the  then  new  doctrine  of  nullifica 
tion.  He  denounced  its  exercise  as  incompatible  with  a  loyal 
adherence  to  the  Constitution,  and  showed  historically  that 
the  government  formed  under  it  was  not  a  mere  "  compact  " 
or  "  league  "  between  sovereign  or  independent  States  termin 
able  at  will.  He  then  asserted  that  any  attempt  of  any  State 
to  act  on  the  theory  of  nullification  would  inevitably  entail 
civil  war  or  a  dissolution  of  the  Union. 

The  first  real  attempt,  however,  at  nullification,  or  the  first 
attempt  of  a  State  to  declare  laws  of  Congress  nugatory  and 
of  no  binding  force  when  not  approved  by  the  State,  was 
made  in  South  Carolina  in  1832,  under  the  leadership  of  John 
C.  Calhoun,  then  Vice-President  of  the  United  States,  and 
hitherto  a  statesman  of  so  much  just  renown,  and  esteemed 
so  moderate  and  patriotic  in  his  views  on  all  national  questions 
as  to  have  been  looked  upon,  with  the  special  approval  of 
the  North,  as  eminently  qualified  for  the  Presidency.  He 
hopefully  aspired  to  it  until  he  quarrelled  with  President  Jack 
son  ;  he  had  been  in  favor  of  a  protective  tariff. 

Cotton  was,  as  we  have  seen,  the  principal  article  of  export, 
and  the  slaveholding  cotton  planters  conceived  the  idea  that  to 
secure  a  market  for  it  there  must  be  no  duties  on  imports,  and 
that  home  manufactures  of  needed  articles  for  consumption 
would  restrict  the  foreign  demand  for  the  raw  material.  Be 
sides,  the  South  with  its  slave  labor  could  not  indulge  in 
manufacturing.  A  tariff  on  imports  meant  protection  to  home 
industries  and  to  free  white  labor,  both  inimical  to  slavery. 
Some  leading  Southern  statesmen,  adherents  of  slavery,  had 
vehemently  opposed  the  ratification  of  the  Constitution  of 
1787,  on  the  ground  that  as  it  empowered  Congress  to  levy 
import  duties,  it  would  encourage  and  build  up  home  indus 
tries,  with  free  labor;  and  they  prophesied  that  with  them 
slavery  would  eventually  become  unprofitable  and  therefore 
unpopular,  hence  would  die.  This  idea  never  left  the  South 
ern  mind,  so,  when  the  Confederacy  of  1861  was  formed,  its 


Nullification  and  Slavery  Agitation          53 

Constitution  (framed  at  Montgomery,  Alabama)  prohibited 
such  duties  for  the  express  reason  that  no  branch  of  industry 
was  to  be  promoted  in  the  new  slave  government,  using  this 
language : 

"  Nor  shall  any  duties  or  taxes  on  importations  from  foreign 
nations  be  laid  to  promote  or  foster  any  branch  of  industry." 

This  was  then  supposed  to  be  the  highest  bulwark  of  slavery. 
Its  votaries  understood  its  strength  and  weakness.  Indepen 
dent,  well-paid  free  labor  and  industries  a  would  ennoble  the 
men  of  toil,  bring  wealth  and  power,  build  up  populous  towns 
and  cities,  and  consequently  overwhelm,  politically  and  other 
wise,  the  institution  of  slavery,  or  draw  into  successful  social 
competition  with  plantation  life  wealthy  inhabitants  who  knew 
not  slavery  and  its  demoralizing  influences. 

Already,  in  1832,  the  effects  of  protection  on  the  prosperity 
of  our  country  were  manifest,  especially  since  the  Tariff  Act  of 
1828,  which  levied  a  duty  equivalent  to  45  per  cent,  ad  valorem. 
The  Act  of  1832  made  a  small  reduction  in  the  duties,  but  be 
cause  it  was  claimed  it  did  not  distribute  them  equally,  nulli 
fication  was  determined  on  as  the  remedy. 

It  was  agreed  by  the  strict  constructionists  of  that  day  that  a 
State  Legislature  could  not  declare  a  law  of  the  United  States 
void,  but  to  do  this  the  people  must  speak  through  a  conven 
tion.  Such  a  convention  met  in  South  Carolina,  in  November, 
1832,  and  passed  a  Nullification  Ordinance,  declaring  the  tariff 
acts  "  null  and  void,"  not  binding  on  the  State,  and  that  under 
them  no  duties  should  be  paid  in  the  State  after  February  I, 

1833- 

Immediately  thereafter  medals  were  struck,  inscribed  "  John 
C.  Calhoun,  first  President  of  the  Southern  Confederacy. ' '  Nulli 
fication,  thus  proclaimed,  was  the  legitimate  forerunner  of 
secession. 

President  Jackson,  with  his  heroic  love  of  the  Union,  re 
garded  the  movement  as  only  treason  ;  he  called  it  that  in  his 

'Confederate  Con.,  Art.  I,  Sec.  8,  par.  i. 

8  The  South  in  the  days  of  slavery  had,  practically,  no  manufactories. 


54  Political  History  of  Slavery 

proclamations ;  he  prepared  to  collect  the  duties  in  Charleston 
or  to  confiscate  the  cargoes;  he  warned  the  nullifiers  by  the 
presence  of  General  Scott  there  that  he  would  be  promptly 
used  to  coerce  the  State  into  loyalty ;  and  he  seemed  eager  to 
find  an  excuse  for  arresting,  condemning  for  treason,  and 
hanging  Calhoun,  who  then  went  to  Washington  as  a  Senator, 
resigning  the  Vice-Presidency.1 
Jackson  tersely  said : 

"  To  say  that  any  State  may,  at  pleasure,  secede  from  the  Union, 
is  to  say  that  the  United  States  are  not  a  nation." 

The  situation  was  too  imminent  for  Calhoun's  nerves.  To 
confront  an  indignant  nation,  led  by  a  fearless,  never  doubting 
President,  was  a  different  thing  then  from  what  it  was  in 
1 860-61  with  Buchanan  as  President,  surrounded  as  he  was  by 
traitors  in  his  Cabinet.  Calhoun  and  his  State  backed  down, 
and  import  duties  continued  to  be  collected  in  South  Carolina, 
although  a  gradual  reduction  of  them  was  made  an  excuse  for 
Calhoun  and  his  friends  in  Congress,  in  1833,  to  vote  for  a 
protective  tariff  act,  so  recently  before  by  them  declared  un 
constitutional.8 

On  a  "  Force  Bill  "  and  a  new  tariff  act  being  passed  (March 
15,  1833)  the  Nullification  Ordinance  was  repealed  in  South 
Carolina.  The  next  Ordinance  of  Secession  of  this  State 
(1860)  was  based  on  the  principles  of  the  first  one  and  the 
doctrines  of  Calhoun,  slavery  being  the  direct,  as  it  had  been 
the  indirect,  cause  of  their  first  enunciation.  We  must  not 
anticipate  here. 

In  the  debate,  in  1833,  between  Webster  and  Calhoun,  the 
former,  as  in  his  great  reply  to  Hayne,3  expounded  the  Con 
stitution  as  a  "  Charter  of  Union  for  all  the  States." 

"  The  Constitution  does  not  provide  for  events  that  must  be  pre 
ceded  by  its  own  destruction. 

"  That  the  Constitution  is  not  a  league,  confederacy,  or  compact 

1  Benton,   Thirty  Years'  Vie-w,  vol.  i.,  p.  343. 

2  Rhodes,  Hist.  U,  S.,  vol.  i.,  pp.  49-50.  3  January  26,  1830. 


Nullification  and  Slavery  Agitation         55 

between  the  people  of  the  several  States  in  their  sovereign  capacity, 
but  a  government  proper,  founded  on  the  adoption  of  the  people, 
and  creating  direct  relations  between  itself  and  individuals.  That 
no  State  authority  has  power  to  dissolve  these  relations.  That  as  to 
certain  purposes  the  people  of  the  United  States  are  one  people." 

Nullification,  attempted  first  on  account  of  a  protective  tariff 
to  foster  home  and  young  industries  and  for  needed  revenue 
to  carry  on  the  Federal  government,  was  in  two  years,  by  its 
author,  Calhoun,  transferred,  for  a  new  cause  on  which  to  at 
tempt  to  justify  it — from  the  tariff  to  domestic  slavery.  Cal 
houn  soon  discovered  and  admitted  that  the  South  could  not 
be  united  against  the  North  and  for  disunion  on  opposition  to 
a  protective  tariff.  He  therefore  promptly  sought  an  oppor 
tunity  to  bring  forward  in  Congress  the  slavery  question,  and 
to  attack  the  "  agitators  "  and  opponents  of  slavery  extension 
in  the  North,  and  to  threaten  disunion  if  the  institution  of 
slavery  was  not  permitted  to  dictate  the  political  policy  of  the 
Republic. 

The  exact  method  of  reviving  in  Congress  the  whole  subject 
of  slavery  so  soon  after  nullification  had  been  so  signally  sup 
pressed  by  Jackson  is  worth  briefly  stating. 

President  Jackson,  in  his  Annual  Message,  December,  1835, 
called  attention  to  attempts  to  use  the  mails  to  circulate 
matter  calculated  to  excite  slaves  to  insurrection,  but  he  did 
not  recommend  any  legislation  to  prevent  it.  Mr.  Calhoun 
moved  in  the  Senate  that  so  much  of  the  message  relating  to 
mail  transportation  of  incendiary  publications  be  referred  to  a 
select  committee  of  five. 

He  was  made  chairman  of  this  committee,  and,  on  his  re 
quest,  three  others  from  the  South,  with  but  one  from  the 
North,  were  put  on  the  committee,  and  he  promptly  made  an 
elaborate  and  carefully-prepared  report,  going  into  the  whole 
doctrine  of  state-rights  and  nullification. 

In  it  he  said 

1  That  the  States  which  form  our  Federal  Union  are  sovereign 
and  independent  communities,  bound  together  by  a  constitutional 


56  Political  History  of  Slavery 

compact,  and  are  possessed  of  all  the  powers  belonging  to  distinct 
and  separate  States,  etc. 

1  The  Compact  itself  expressly  provides  that  all  powers  not  dele 
gated  are  reserved  to  the  States  and  the  people.  .  .  .  On  re 
turning  to  the  Constitution,  it  will  be  seen  that,  while  the  power  of 
defending  the  country  against  external  danger  is  found  among  the 
enumerated,  the  instrument  is  wholly  silent  as  to  the  power  of  de 
fending  the  internal  peace  and  security  of  the  States:  and  of  course 
reserves  to  the  States  this  important  power,  etc. 

"  It  belongs  to  slave-holding  States,  whose  institutions  are  in 
danger,  and  not  to  Congress,  as  is  supposed  by  the  message,  to  de 
termine  what  papers  are  incendiary  and  intended  to  excite  insur 
rection  among  the  slaves,  etc. 

"  It  has  already  been  stated  that  the  States  which  compose  our 
Federal  Union  are  sovereign  and  independent  communities,  united 
by  a  constitutional  compact.  Among  its  members  the  laws  of  na 
tions  are  in  full  force  and  obligation,  except  as  altered  or  modified 
by  the  compact,  etc. 

14  Within  their  limits,  the  rights  of  the  slave-holding  States  are  as 
full  to  demand  of  the  States  within  whose  limits  and  jurisdiction 
their  peace  is  assailed,  to  adopt  the  measures  necessary  to  prevent 
the  same,  and,  if  refused  or  neglected,  to  resort  to  means  to  protect 
themselves,  as  if  they  were  separate  and  independent  communities." 

Here,  perhaps,  was  the  clearest  statement  yet  made,  not 
only  of  the  independence  of  States  from  Federal  interference 
and  of  their  right,  on  their  own  whim,  to  break  the  "  compact  " 
but  of  the  right  of  the  slaveholding  States  to  dictate  to  the 
other  States  legislation  on  the  subject  of  slavery. 

It  was  at  once  a  declaration  of  independence  for  the  Southern 
States,  and  a  declaration  of  their  right  to  hold  all  the  Northern 
States  so  far  subject  to  them  as  to  be  obliged,  on  demand,  to 
pass  and  enforce  any  prescribed  law  in  the  interest  of  slavery. 
The  South  was  to  be  the  sole  judge  of  what  law  on  this  subject 
was  requisite  for  slavery's  purposes. 

No  duty  was  demanded  on  this  question  of  the  Federal 
Government;  and  Southern  States,  according  to  Calhoun, 
owed  it  none  where  slavery  was  concerned. 

Calhoun  and  his  committee  could  discover  no  power  in  the 


Nullification  and  Slavery  Agitation          57 

Southern  States  to  enforce  their  demands  save  to  act  as  sepa 
rate  and  independent  communities — that  is,  by  setting  up  for 
themselves.  This  led  logically  to  disunion,  the  result  intended. 

There  was  much  in  this  report  setting  forth  and  professing 
to  believe  that  it  was  the  purpose  of  the  North  to  emancipate 
the  slaves,  and  through  the  agencies  of  organized  anti-slavery 
societies  bring  about  slave  insurrections.  The  fanaticism  of 
the  North  was  descanted  on,  and  the  character  of  slavery  and 
its  wisdom  as  a  social  institution  upheld. 

He  further  said : 

"  He  who  regards  slavery  in  those  States  simply  under  the  relation 
of  master  and  slave,  as  important  as  that  relation  is,  viewed  merely 
as  a  question  of  property  to  the  slave-holding  section  of  the  Union, 
has  a  very  imperfect  conception  of  the  institution,  and  the  impossi 
bility  of  abolishing  it  without  disasters  unexampled  in  the  history  of 
the  world.  To  understand  its  nature  and  importance  fully,  it  must 
be  borne  in  mind  that  slavery,  as  it  exists  in  the  Southern  States,  in 
volves  not  only  the  relation  of  master  and  slave,  but  also  the  social  and 
political  relation  of  the  two  races,  of  nearly  equal  numbers,  from 
different  quarters  of  the  globe,  and  the  most  opposite  of  all  others 
in  every  particular  that  distinguishes  one  race  of  men  from  another." 

The  whole  report  was  replete  with  accusations  against  the 
North,  and  full  of  warning  as  to  what  the  South  would  do 
should  its  demands  not  be  complied  with.  The  bill  brought 
in  by  the  committee  was  more  remarkable  than  the  report 
itself,  and  wholly  inconsistent  with  its  doctrine. 

The  bill  provided  high  penalties  for  any  postmaster  who 
should  knowingly  receive  and  put  into  the  mail  any  publication 
or  picture  touching  the  subject  of  slavery,  to  go  into  any  State 
or  Territory  in  which  its  circulation  was  forbidden  by  state  law. 

The  report  concluded : 

"  Should  such  be  your  decision,  by  refusing  to  pass  this  bill,  I 
shall  say  to  the  people  of  the  South,  look  to  yourselves. 

"  But  I  must  tell  the  Senate,  be  your  decision  what  it  may,  the 
South  will  never  abandon  the  principles  of  this  bill.  .  .  .  We 
have  a  remedy  in  our  own  hands." 


58  Political  History  of  Slavery 


Clay,  Webster,  Benton,  and  others  ably  and  effectually  com 
bated  both  the  report  and  the  bill,  and  the  latter  failed  (25  to 
19)  in  the  Senate. 

Besides  denying  the  doctrine  of  the  report,  they  showed  the 
evil  was  not  in  mailing,  but  in  taking  from  the  mails  and  cir 
culating  by  their  own  citizens  the  supposed  objectionable 
publications. 

Benton,  himself  a  slaveholder,  then  and  in  subsequent  years 
assailed  and  pronounced  the  doctrine  of  this  report  as  the 
"  birth  of  disunion."  He  has  also  shown  that  Calhoun  de 
lighted  over  the  agitation  of  slavery  more  than  he  deprecated 
it ;  that  he  profoundly  hoped  that  on  the  slavery  question  the 
South  would  be  united  and  a  Slave-Confederacy  formed.1 

In  support  of  this  Mr.  Benton  quotes  from  a  letter  of  Mr. 
Calhoun  to  a  gentleman  in  Alabama  (1847)  *n  which  he  says: 

"  I  am  much  gratified  with  the  tone  and  views  of  your  letter,  and 
concur  entirely  in  the  opinion  you  express,  that  instead  of  shunning, 
we  ought  to  court  the  issue  with  the  North  on  the  slavery  question. 
I  would  even  go  one  step  further  and  add  that  it  is  our  duty  to  force 
the  issue  on  the  North.  We  are  now  stronger  relatively  than  we 
shall  be  hereafter,  politically  and  morally.  Unless  we  bring  on  the 
issue,  delay  to  us  will  be  dangerous  indeed.  .  .  .  Something 
of  the  kind  was  indispensable  to  the  South.  On  the  contrary,  if  we 
should  not  meet  it  as  we  ought,  I  fear,  greatly  fear,  our  doom  will 
be  fixed."3 

Comment  is  unnecessary,  but  the  letter,  almost  exultantly, 
mentions  as  fortunate  that  the  Wilmot  Proviso  was  offered,  as 
it  gave  an  opportunity  to  unite  the  South. 

It  proceeds: 

' '  With  this  impression,  I  would  regard  any  compromise  or  ad 
justment  of  the  proviso,  or  even  its  defeat,  without  meeting  the 
danger  in  its  whole  length  and  breadth,  as  very  unfortunate  for  us. 

1  For  this  report  and  its  history  see  Benton's  Thirty  Years'  View,  vol.  i.,  pp. 
580,  etc. 

2  Thirty   Years'  View,  vol.  ii.,  chap,  clxxxix.  ;  Historical,  etc.  Examination, 
Dred  Scott  Case  (Benton),  p.  139. 


Nullification  and  Slavery  Agitation         59 

"  This  brings  up  the  question,  how  can  it  be  so  met,  without  re 
sorting  to  the  dissolution  of  the  Union. 

'  There  is  and  can  be  but  one  remedy  short  of  disunion,  and  that 
is  to  retaliate  on  our  part  by  refusing  to  fulfill  the  stipulations  in 
their  (other  States)  favor,  or  such  as  we  may  select,  as  the  most 
efficient." 

The  letter,  still  proceeding  to  discuss  modes  of  dissolution 
or  retaliation  against  Northern  States,  declares  a  convention 
of  Southern  States  indispensable,  and  their  co-operation  abso 
lutely  essential  to  success,  and  says : 

"  Let  that  be  called,  and  let  it  adopt  measures  to  bring  about  the 
co-operation,  and  I  would  underwrite  for  the  rest.  The  non-slave- 
holding  States  would  be  compelled  to  observe  the  stipulations  of  the 
Constitution  in  our  favor,  or  abandon  their  trade  with  us,  or  to  take 
measures  to  coerce  us,  which  would  throw  on  them  the  responsibility 
of  dissolving  the  Union.  Their  unbounded  avarice  would  in  the 
end  control  them."  1 

It  is  certain  that  President  Jackson's  heroic  proclamation  of 
December,  1832,  aborted  the  project  of  nullification  under  the 
South  Carolina  Ordinance,  and  certain  it  is,  also,  that  the  dis 
appointed  leaders  of  it  turned  from  a  protective  tariff  as  a 
ground  for  it,  to  what  they  regarded  as  a  better  excuse,  to 
wit :  a  slavery  agitation,  generated  out  of  false  alarms  in  the 
slave  States. 

After  the  tariff  compromise  of  1833,  in  which  Calhoun 
sullenly  acquiesced,  he  returned  home  and  immediately  an 
nounced  that  the  South  would  never  unite  against  the  North 
on  the  tariff  question, — "  That  the  sugar  interest  of  Louisiana 
would  keep  her  out, — and  consequently  the  basis  of  Southern 
union  must  be  shifted  to  the  slave  question,"  which  was  then 
accordingly  done.8 

Jackson,  discussing  nullification,  is  reported  to  have  said : 

"  It  was  the  tariff  this  time  ;  next  time  it  will  be  the  negro.'' 

1  Historical,  etc.,  Examination,  Dred  Scott  Case  (Benton),  p.  141-4. 
</.,  p.  181. 


60  Political  History  of  Slavery 

This  new  and  dangerous  departure  was  not  overlooked.  The 
report  and  bill  in  1835  relating  to  the  use  of  the  mails  was  only 
a  chapter  in  execution  of  the  new  plan. 

The  observing  friends  of  the  Union  did  not  overlook  or  mis 
understand  the  movement.  They  at  once  took  alarm.  Mr. 
Clay,  in  May,  1833,  wrote  a  letter  to  Mr.  Madison  expressing 
his  apprehensions  of  the  new  danger,  which  brought  from  him 
a  prompt  response. 

Mr.  Madison  in  his  letter  said : 

"  It  is  painful  to  see  the  unceasing  efforts  to  alarm  the  South  by 
imputations  against  the  North  of  unconstitutional  designs  on  the 
subject  of  the  slaves.  You  are  right.  I  have  no  doubt  that  no 
such  intermeddling  disposition  exists  in  the  body  of  our  Northern 
brethren.  The  good  faith  is  sufficiently  guaranteed  by  the  interest 
they  have  as  merchants,  ship-owners,  and  as  manufacturers,  in  pre 
serving  a  union  with  the  slave-holding  States.  On  the  other  hand, 
what  madness  in  the  South  to  look  for  greater  safety  in  disunion. ' '  1 

What  Clay  and  Madison  saw  in  1833  as  tne  real  starting- 
point  for  ultimate  secession  proved  true  to  history.  From 
that  time  dates  the  machinations  which  led,  through  the  steps 
that  successively  followed,  to  actual  dissolution  of  the  Union 
in  1860-61;  then  to  coercion — War;  then  to  the  eradication 
of  slavery.  It  was  Southern  madness  that  hastened  the  de 
struction  of  American  slavery.  '  Whom  the  gods  would 
destroy,  they  first  make  mad." 

The  excuse  for  even  this  much  significance  given  to  "  nulli 
fication  "  is,  that  in  less  than  thirty  years,  under  a  new  name 

"  state-rights  "  —it  worked  secession — disunion,  and  lit  up 
the  whole  country  with  the  flames  and  frenzy  of  internal  war 
that  did  not  die  down  for  four  years  more  ;  and  then  only  when 
slavery  was  consumed. 

The  great  abolition  movement  commenced  in  earnest,  Jan 
uary  i,  1831.  Wm.  Lloyd  Garrison  published,  at  Boston,  the 
Lib  i  rator,  with  the  motto — "Our  countrymen  are  all  mankind." 
Benjamin  Lundy,  and  perhaps  others,  had  preceded  Garrison, 

1  Historical,  etc.,  Ex.,  Dred  Scott  Case,  pp.  181-2. 


Nullification  and  Slavery  Agitation          61 

but  not  until  after  the  Webster-Hayne  debate  did  the  abolition 
movement  spread.  Thenceforth  it  took  deeper  root  in  the 
human  conscience,  and  it  had  advocates  of  determined  spirit 
throughout  the  North,  led  on  fearlessly,  not  alone  by  Garrison, 
but  by  Rev.  Dr.  Channing,  Rev.  James  Freeman  Clarke,  and, 
later,  by  Rev.  Samuel  May  (Syracuse,  N.  Y.),  Gerritt  Smith, 
the  poet  Whittier,  Wendell  Phillips,  Theodore  Parker,  Horace 
Mann,  Charles  Sumner,  Joshua  R.  Giddings,  Owen  Lovejoy, 
and  others,  who  spoke  from  pulpit,  rostrum,  and  some  in  the 
halls  of  legislation ;  others  in  the  courts  and  through  the 
press.  The  enforcement  of  the  fugitive-slave  law  was  often 
violent,  and  always  added  new  fuel  to  the  fierce  and  constantly 
growing  opposition  to  slavery. 

The  Anti-Slavery  party  was  not  one  wholly  built  on  abstract 
sentiment  of  philanthropists,  but  it  involved  physical  resistance : 
violence  to  violence. 

The  American  Anti-Slavery  Society  was  founded  at  a 
National  Anti-Slavery  Convention  held  in  Philadelphia,  in 
December,  1831. 

Hard  upon  the  establishment  of  the  Liberator  came  the  Nat 
Turner  insurrection  in  Southampton  County,  Virginia  (August, 
1831).  This  gave  to  the  South  a  fresh  ground  to  complain  of 
the  North.  Turner's  insurrection  was  held  to  be  the  legitimate 
fruit  of  abolition  agitation.  Turner  was  an  African  of  natural 
capacity,  who  quoted  the  Bible  fluently,  prayed  vehemently, 
and  preached  to  his  fellow  slaves. 

He  told  them,  as  did  Joan  of  Arc,  of  "  Voices"  and 
'  Visions"  and  of  his  communion  with  the  Holy  Spirit.  An 
eclipse  of  the  sun  was  the  signal  to  strike  their  enemies  and 
for  freedom.  The  massacre  lasted  forty-eight  hours,  and 
sixty-one  whites,  women  and  children  not  spared,  were  victims. 
On  the  other  hand,  negroes  were  shot,  tortured,  hanged,  and 
burned  at  the  stake  on  whom  the  slightest  suspicion  of  com 
plicity  fell. 

The  Nat  Turner  negro  slave  insurrection  is  the  only  one 
known  to  slavery  in  the  United  States.  Others  may  possibly 
have  been  contemplated.  The  John  Brown  raid  was  not  a 


62  Political  History  of  Slavery 

negro  insurrection.  Even  in  the  midst  of  the  war  (1861-65), 
believed  by  most  slaves  to  be  a  war  for  their  freedom,  insur 
rections  were  unknown.1 

The  African  race,  the  most  wronged  through  the  centuries, 
has  been  the  most  docile  and  the  least  revengeful  of  the  races 
of  the  world. 

XIV 

TEXAS — ADMISSION    INTO    THE    UNION    (1845) 

Texas  was  a  province  of  Mexico  when  the  latter  seceded 
from  Spain  through  a  "  Proclamation  of  Independence  "  by 
Iturbide  (February  24,  1821)  with  a  view  to  establishing  a 
constitutional  monarchy.  At  the  end  of  about  two  years  of 
Iturbide's  reign,  this  form  of  government  was  overthrown,  and 
he  was  compelled  (March  19,  1823)  to  resign  his  crown. 
Through  the  efforts,  principally  of  General  Santa  Anna,  a 
Republic  was  established  under  a  Constitution,  modelled,  in 
large  part,  on  that  of  the  United  States,  which  went  into  full 
effect  October  4,  1824.  Spain  did  not  formally  recognize  the 
independence  of  Mexico  until  1836.  The  Mexican  Republic 
was  opposed  to  slavery,  and  after  some  of  her  provinces  had 
decreed  freedom  to  slaves  its  President  (Guerro),  September 
15,  1829,  decreed  its  total  abolition,  but  as  Texas,  on  account 
of  slave-holding  settlers  from  the  United  States,  demurred  to 
the  decree,  another  one  followed,  April  5,  1837,  by  the  Mexi 
can  Congress,  also  abolishing  slavery,  without  exception,  in 
Texas.  Desr  :te  these  decrees  the  American  settlers  carried 
slaves  into  Texas,  which  became  a  part  of  the  State  of  Coahuila, 
whose  Constitution  also  forbade  the  importation  of  slaves. 

1  There  were  some  small  insurrections  and  some  threatened  ones  in  the  colonies 
as  early  as  1660,  the  guilty  negroes  or  Indians  being  then  punished  by  crucifixion, 
burning,  and  by  starvation  ;  other  insurrections  took  place  in  the  Carolinas  and 
Georgia  in  1734,  and  the  Cato  insurrection  occurred  at  Stono,  S.  C.,  in  1740. 
There  was  a  wide  spread  "  Negro  Plot  "  in  New  York  in  1712.  These  attempts 
alarmed  the  colonies  and  caused  some  of  them  to  take  steps  to  abolish  slavery. 
— Sup.  of  African  Slave-Trade  U.  S.,  pp.  6,  10,  22,  206. 


Texas — Admission  as  a  State  63 

Thus  was  slavery  extension  to  the  southwest  cut  off  by  a 
power  not  likely  ever  to  be  in  sympathy  with  it.  It  is  worthy 
of  note  that  neither  the  independent  Spanish  blood  (notwith 
standing  Spain's  deep  guilt  in  the  conduct  of  the  slave  trade), 
nor  that  blood  as  intermixed  with  the  Indian,  nor  the  Mexican 
Indians  themselves,  ever  willingly  maintained  human  slavery 
in  America.  Mexico's  established  religion  under  her  Consti 
tution,  being  Roman  Catholic,  did  not  permit  its  perpetuation. 
The  Pope  of  Rome,  in  the  nineteenth  century  and  earlier,  had 
denounced  it  as  inhuman  and  contrary  to  divine  justice. 

The  maintenance  of  slavery  in  Texas  was  regarded  as  of 
paramount  importance  to  the  South,  and  as  slavery  could  not 
exist  in  Texas  under  Mexican  authority,  efforts  were  put  forth 
to  secure  her  independence,  then  to  annex  her  to  the  United 
States  as  a  State  wherein  slavery  should  exist.  Even  Clay,  as 
Secretary  of  State,  under  Adams,  in  1827,  proposed  to  pur 
chase  Texas.  President  Jackson,  in  1830,  offered  $5,000,000 
for  Texas.  The  Mexican  Government,  foreseeing  the  coming 
danger,  by  law  prohibited  American  immigration  into  Texas, 
but  this  was  unavailing,  as  the  ever-unscrupulous  hand  of 
slavery  was  reaching  out  for  more  room  and  more  territory  to 
perpetuate  itself.  Americans,  like  their  natural  kinsmen  the 
Englishmen,  then  regarded  not  the  rights  of  others,  the  weak 
especially,  when  the  slave  power  was  involved. 

Sam  Houston,  of  Tennessee,  a  capable  man  who  had  fought 
under  Jackson  in  the  Indian  wars,  inspired  by  his  pro-slavery 
proclivities  in  1835,  went  to  Texas  avowedly  to  wrest  Texas 
from  free  Mexico,  and,  it  is  said,  of  his  real  intentions  Presi 
dent  Jackson  was  not  ignorant.  TV 

The  unfortunate  internal  political  contentions  in  Mexico 
gave  the  intruding  Americans  pretexts  for  disputes  which  soon 
led  to  the  desired  conflicts  with  the  Mexican  authorities. 

Santa  Anna,  who  had,  through  a  revolution,  put  himself  at 
the  head  of  the  new  Mexican  Republic,  attempted  to  coerce 
the  invading  settlers  to  observance  of  the  laws,  but  in  this  was 
only  partially  successful.  On  March  2,  1836,  a  Texan  Declara 
tion  of  Independence  was  issued,  signed  by  about  sixty  men,  two 


64  Political  History  of  Slavery 

of  whom  only  were  Texas-Mexicans,  and  this  was  followed  by 
a  Constitution  for  the  Republic  of  Texas,  chief  among  its  ob 
jects  being  the  establishment  of  human  slavery.  Santa  Anna, 
with  the  natural  fierceness  of  the  Spanish-Indian,  waged  a 
ferocious  war  on  the  revolutionists.  A  garrison  of  250  men 
at  "  The  Alamo,"  a  small  mission  church  near  San  Antonio, 
was  taken  by  him  after  heroic  resistance,  and  massacred  to  a 
man. 

'  Thermopylae    had    her    messenger    of    defeat,    but    The 
Alamo  had  none." 

David  Crockett,  an  uneducated,  eccentric  Tennessean,  who 
was  a  celebrated  hunter,  Indian  fighter,  story  teller,  wit,  and 
member  of  Congress  three  terms  (where  he  opposed  President 
Jackson,  and  refused  to  obey  any  party  commanding  him  "  to- 
go-wo-haw-gee,"  just  at  his  pleasure)  here  lost  his  life.  On 
the  2/th  of  the  same  month  500  more  Americans  at  Goliad 
were  also  massacred.  These  atrocities  were  used  successfully 
to  produce  sympathy  and  create  excitement  in  the  United 
States.  On  April  21,  1836,  a  decisive  battle  was  fought  at  San 
Jacinto  between  Santa  Anna's  army  of  1500  men  and  a  body 
of  800  men  under  General  Sam  Houston,  in  which  the  former 
was  defeated,  and  Santa  Anna,  the  President  of  Mexico,  cap 
tured.  While  a  prisoner,  to  save  his  life  he  immediately  con 
cluded  an  armistice  with  Houston,  agreeing  to  evacuate  Texas 
and  procure  the  recognition  by  Mexico  of  its  independence. 
This  the  Mexican  Congress  afterwards  refused.  But  in  Octo 
ber,  1836,  with  a  Constitution  modelled  on  that  of  the  United 
States,  the  Republic  of  Texas  (recognizing  slavery)  was  organ 
ized,  with  Houston  as  President,  and  forthwith  the  United 
States  recognized  its  independence. 

In  a  few  months  application  was  made  to  the  United  States 
to  receive  it  into  the  Union,  but  on  account  of  a  purpose  to 
divide  Texas  into  a  number  of  slave  States  to  secure  the  pre 
ponderance  of  the  slave  political  power  in  the  Union,  which 
for  want  of  sufficient  population  was  not  immediately  possible, 
her  admission  was  delayed,  and  Sam  Houston's  Republic  of 
Texas  existed  for  above  eight  years.  President  Van  Buren, 


Texas — Admission  as  a  State  65 

who  succeeded  Jackson  as  President,  was  opposed  to  its  an 
nexation,  and  it  was  left  to  the  apostate  Tyler  to  take  up  the 
business. 

He,  too,  would  have  failed  but  Mr.  Upshur,  his  Secretary 
of  State,  being  killed  in  1844  by  the  accidental  explosion  of  a 
cannon,  John  C.  Calhoun  became  his  successor.  The  latter  at 
once  arranged  a  treaty  of  annexation,  but  this  the  Senate 
rejected.  Both  Van  Buren  and  Clay,  leading  candidates  of 
their  respective  parties  for  the  Presidency  in  1844,  were  op 
posed  to  the  annexation ;  the  former  was  defeated  for  nomina 
tion,  and  the  latter  at  the  election,  because,  during  the  canvass, 
to  please  the  slaveholding  Whigs  he  sought  to  shift  his  posi 
tion,  thus  losing  his  anti-slavery  friends,  "  whose  votes  would 
have  elected  him  ' ' ;  and  Polk  became  President.  Annexation, 
however,  did  not  wait  for  his  administration. 

In  the  House  of  Representatives,  in  December,  1844,  an 
attempt  was  made  to  admit  Texas,  half  to  be  free  and  half 
slave,  making  two  States. 

By  resolutions  of  Congress,  dated  March  I,  1845,  consent 
was  given  to  erect  Texas  into  a  State  with  a  view  to  annexa 
tion;  and  in  order  that  she  might  be  admitted  into  the  Union 
such  resolutions  provided  that  thereafter  four  other  States, 
with  her  consent,  might  be  formed  out  of  its  territory.  In 
August  succeeding,  a  Constitution  was  framed  prohibiting 
emancipation  of  slaves1  and  authorizing  their  importation  into 
Texas,  which  was  thereafter  adopted  by  the  people  of  the  Re 
public  of  Texas,  under  which  Congress,  by  resolution  (Decem 
ber  29,  1845)  formally  admitted  Texas  into  the  Union — the 
last  slave  State  admitted. 

As  a  sop  to  Northern  "  dough-faces,"  and  to  induce  them 
to  vote  for  the  resolutions  of  March  1st,  it  recited  that  the 
new  States  lying  south  of  latitude  36°  30'  should  be  admitted 
with  or  without  slavery  as  their  inhabitants  might  decide, 
those  north  of  that  line  without  slavery.  In  the  subsequent 
adjustment  of  the  north  boundary  line  of  Texas,  it  was  found 

1  How  different  is  Texas'  Constitution  of  1876,  the  first  paragraph  of  which  runs : 
44  Texas  is  a  free  and  independent  State." 


66  Political  History  of  Slavery 

no  part  of  it  was  within  two  hundred  miles  of  36°  30' ;  so  all  of 
Texas  (in  territory  an  empire,  in  area  240,000  square  miles,  six 
times  greater  than  Ohio)  was  thus  dedicated  forever,  by  law, 
to  human  slavery,  in  the  professed  interest  of  the  nineteenth 
century  civilization.  The  intrigue,  the  bad  faith,  the  perfidy 
by  which  this  great  political  and  moral  wrong  was  consummated 
were  laid  up  against  the  "  day  of  wrath." 

XV 

MEXICAN    WAR ACQUISITION    OF    CALIFORNIA    AND    NEW    MEXICO 

1846-8 

With  Texas  came  naturally  a  desire  for  more  slave  territory. 
Wrong  is  never  satiated ;  it  hungers  as  it  feeds  on  its  prey. 

Pretence  for  quarrel  arose  over  the  boundary  line  between 
Texas  and  Mexico.  The  United  States  unjustly  claimed  that 
the  Rio  Grande  was  the  southwestern  boundary  of  Texas  in 
stead  of  the  Nueces,  as  Mexico  maintained.  Mexico  was 
invaded,  her  cities,  including  her  ancient  capital,  were  taken, 
and  her  badly-organized  armies  overthrown.  Congress,  by  an 
Act  of  May  13,  1846,  declared  that  "  by  the  act  of  the  Repub 
lic  of  Mexico  a  state  of  war  existed  between  that  government 
and  the  United  States/'  and  it  virtually  ended  in  September, 
1847,  though  the  final  treaty  of  peace  at  Guadalupe  Hidalgo 
was  not  signed  until  February  2,  1848.  While  the  annexation 
of  Texas  was  regarded  by  Mexico  as  a  cause  of  war,  yet  she 
did  not  declare  war  on  that  ground. 

The  principle  of  "  manifest  destiny"  was  proclaimed  for 
the  United  States.  In  the  prosecution  of  the  war,  with  shame 
less  effrontery  it  was  justified  on  the  necessity  that  "  we  want 
room  "  for  the  two  hundred  millions  of  inhabitants  soon  to  be 
under  our  flag. 

Answering  this  cry,  put  up  by  Senator  Cass  of  Michigan, 
Senator  Thomas  Corwin,  in  a  spirit  of  prophecy,  said : 

"  But  you  still  say  you  want  room  for  your  people.  This  has 
been  the  plea  of  every  robber-chief  from  Nimrod  to  the  present 


Mexican  War  and  Acquisition  of  Territory    67 

hour.  I  dare  say,  when  Tamerlane  descended  from  his  throne, 
built  of  seventy  thousand  human  skulls,  and  marched  his  ferocious 
battalions  to  further  slaughter, — I  dare  say  he  said,  '  I  want  room.' 
Alexander,  too,  the  mighty  *  Macedonian  Madman,'  when  he  wan 
dered  with  his  Greeks  to  the  plains  of  India,  and  fought  a  bloody 
battle  on  the  very  ground  where  recently  England  and  the  Sikhs 
engaged  in  strife  for  '  room  '  .  .  .  Sir,  he  made  quite  as  much  of 
that  sort  of  history  as  you  ever  will.  Mr.  President,  do  you  remember 
the  last  chapter  in  that  history  ?  It  is  soon  read.  Oh  !  I  wish  we 
could  understand  its  moral.  Ammon's  son  (so  was  Alexander 
named),  after  all  his  victories,  died  drunk  in  Babylon.  The  vast 
empire  he  conquered  to  *  get  room  '  became  the  prey  of  the  generals 
he  trained  ;  it  was  desparted,  torn  to  pieces,  and  so  ended.  Sir, 
there  is  a  very  significant  appendix  ;  it  is  this  :  the  descendants  of 
the  Greeks — of  Alexander's  Greeks — are  now  governed  by  a  de 
scendant  of  Attilla." 

Through  the  greed  of  the  slave  power  Texas  was  acquired, 
and  they  still  longed  for  more  slave  territory,  and  weak  Mexico 
alone  could  be  depleted  to  obtain  it. 

Southern  California  and  New  Mexico  had  a  sufficiently 
warm  climate  for  slavery  to  flourish  in. 

The  war  was  far  from  popular,  though  the  pride  of  national 
patriotism  supported  it.  Clay  and  Webster  each  opposed  it, 
and  each  gave  a  son  to  it.1 

Abraham  Lincoln,  then  for  a  single  term  in  Congress,  spoke 
against  it,  but,  like  most  other  members  holding  similar  views, 
voted  men,  money,  and  supplies  to  carry  it  on. 

Senator  Benton  of  Missouri,  a  party  friend  to  the  adminis 
tration  of  Polk  and  favoring  the  war,  said : 

"The  truth  was,  an  intrigue  was  laid  for  peace  before  the  war 
was  declared  !  And  this  intrigue  was  even  part  of  the  scheme  for 
making  war.  It  is  impossible  to  conceive  of  an  administration  less 
warlike,  or  more  intriguing,  than  that  of  Mr.  Polk.  They  were  men 
of  peace,  with  objects  to  be  accomplished  by  means  of  war.  .  .  . 
They  wanted  a  small  war,  just  large  enough  to  require  a  treaty  of 

1  Lt.-Col.  Henry  Clay,  Jr.,  fell  at  Buena  Vista  February  23,  1847,  and  Maj. 
Edward  Webster  died  at  San  Angel,  Mexico,  January  23,  1848. 


68  Political  History  of  Slavery 

peace,  and  not  large  enough  to  make  military  reputations  danger 
ous  for  the  Presidency."  * 

It  was  predicted  the  war  would  not  last  to  exceed  "  90  to 
120  days."  The  proposed  conquest  of  Mexico  was  so  inlaid 
with  treachery  that  this  prediction  was  justified.  The  Admin 
istration  conspired  with  the  then  exiled  Santa  Anna  "  not  to 
obstruct  his  return  to  Mexico." 

"  It  was  the  arrangement  with  Santa  Anna  !  We  to  put  him  back 
in  Mexico,  and  he  to  make  peace  with  us  :  of  course  an  agreeable 
peace  .  .  .  not  without  receiving  a  consideration  :  and  in  this 
case  some  millions  of  dollars  \vere  required — not  for  himself,  of 
course,  but  to  enable  him  to  promote  the  peace  at  home."2 

Accordingly,  in  August,  1846,  before  Buena  Vista  and  other 
signal  successes  in  the  war,  the  President  asked  an  appropria 
tion  of  $2,000,000  to  be  used  in  promoting  a  peace. 

But  already  jealousy  and  envy  towards  the  generals  in  the 
field  had  arisen,  which  culminated  in  President  Polk  offering 
to  confer  on  Senator  Thomas  H.  Benton  (of  his  own  party) 
the  rank  of  Lieutenant-General,  with  full  command,  thus 
superseding  the  Whig  Generals,  Winfield  Scott  and  Zachary 
Taylor,  then  possible  Presidential  candidates.3 

The  acquisition  of  more  territory  from  Mexico  being  no 
secret,  a  bill  for  the  desired  appropriation  precipated,  un 
expectedly,  a  most  violent  discussion  of  the  slavery  question, 
never  again  allayed  until  slavery  was  eliminated  from  the 
Union. 

A  Democratic  Representative  from  Pennsylvania,  David 
Wilmot,  who  favored  the  acquisition  of  California  and  New 
Mexico,  for  the  purpose  of  "preserving  the  equilibrium  of 
States,"  and  as  an  offset  to  the  already  acquired  slave  State 
of  Texas,  which  was  then  expected  to  be  soon  erected  into 

1  Thirty   Years'   View,  vol.  ii.,  p.  680.  *  Ibid,,  p.  681. 

3  Taylor  became  President  March,  1849,  succeeding  Polk,  and  died  in  office  July 
Q,  1850.  Scott  was  nominated  by  his  party  (Whig)  in  1852,  and  defeated  ;  Frank 
lin  Pierce,  a  subordinate  General  of  the  war,  was  elected  by  his  party  (Democrat) 
President  in  1852. 


Mexican  War  and  Acquisition  of  Territory    69 

five  slave  States,  moved,  August,  1846,  the  following  proviso 
to  the  "  two  million  bill  "  : 

"  That  no  part  of  the  territory  to  be  acquired  should  be  open  to 
the  introduction  of  slavery." 

This  famous  "  Wilmot  Proviso  "  never  became  a  part  of  any 
law;  its  sole  importance  was  in  its  frequent  presentation  and 
the  violent  discussions  over  it. 

Thus  far  the  national  wrong  against  Mexico  had  for  its 
manifest  object  the  spread  of  slavery. 

The  proposition  to  seize  Mexican  territory  and  dedicate  it 
to  freedom  threw  the  advocates  of  slavery  and  the  war  into  a 
frenzy,  and  consternation  in  high  circles  prevailed. 

The  proviso  was  adopted  in  the  House,  but  failed  in  the 
Senate.  It  was,  in  February,  1847,  again,  by  the  House, 
tacked  on  the  "  three  million  bill,"  but  being  struck  out  in 
the  Senate,  the  bill  passed  the  House  without  it.  But  the 
proviso  had  done  its  work;  the  whole  North  was  alive  to  its 
importance,  and  Presidential  and  Congressional  timber  blos 
somed  or  withered  accordingly  as  it  did  or  did  not  fly  a  banner 
inscribed  "  Wilmot  Proviso" 

Calhoun,  professing  great  alarm  and  great  concern  for  the 
Constitution,  on  February  19,  1847,  introduced  into  the  Sen 
ate  his  celebrated  resolutions  declaring,  among  other  things, 
that  the  Territories  belonged  to  the  "  several  States  .  .  . 
as  their  joint  and  common  property."  '  That  the  enactment 
of  any  law  which  should  .  .  .  deprive  the  citizens  of  any 
of  the  States  .  .  .  from  emigrating  with  their  property 
[slaves]  into  any  of  the  Territories  .  .  .  would  be  a  viola 
tion  of  the  Constitution  and  the  rights  of  the  States,  .  .  . 
and  would  tend  directly  to  subvert  the  Union  itself." 

Here  was  the  doctrine  of  state-rights  born  into  full  life, 
with  the  old  doctrine  of  nullification  embodied.  Benton, 
speaking  of  the  dangerous  character  of  Calhoun's  resolutions, 
said  of  them : 

"  As  Sylla  saw,  in  the  young  Caesar  many  Mariuses,  so  did  he  sec 
in  them  many  nullifications." 


7°  Political  History  of  Slavery 

Benton,  quite  familiar  with  the  whole  history  of  slavery  be 
fore,  during,  and  after  the  Mexican  War,  himself  a  Senator 
from  a  slave  State,  says  the  Wilmot  proviso  "  was  secretly 
cherished  as  a  means  of  keeping  up  discord,  and  forcing  the 
issue  between  the  North  and  the  South,"  by  Calhoun  and  his 
friends,  citing  Mr.  Calhoun's  Alabama  letter  of  1847,  already 
quoted,  in  proof  of  his  statement. 

By  the  treaty  of  Guadalupe  Hidalgo  (February,  1848)  for 
$15,000,000  (above  $3,000,000  more  than  was  paid  Napoleon 
for  the  Louisiana  Province),  New  Mexico  and  Upper  California 
were  ceded  by  Mexico  to  the  United  States,  and  the  Rio 
Grande  from  El  Paso  to  its  mouth  became  the  boundary  be 
tween  the  two  countries.  Upper  California  is  now  the  State 
of  California,  and  the  New  Mexico  thus  acquired  included 
much  of  the  present  New  Mexico,  nearly  all  of  Arizona,  sub 
stantially  all  of  Utah  and  Nevada,  and  the  western  portion  of 
Colorado,  in  area  545,000  square  miles,  which,  together  with 
the  Gadsden  Purchase,  by  further  treaty  with  Mexico  (Decem 
ber  30,  1853)  for  $10,000,000  more,  completed  the  despoiling 
of  the  sister  Republic.  The  territory  acquired  by  the  last 
treaty  now  constitutes  the  southern  part  of  Arizona  and  the 
southwest  corner  of  New  Mexico. 

Almost  contemporaneous  with  the  invasion  of  Mexico,  and 
as  part  of  the  plan  for  the  acquisition  of  her  territory,  Buchanan, 
then  Secretary  of  State,  dispatched  Lieutenant  Gillespie,  of  the 
United  States  Army,  via  Vera  Cruz,  the  City  of  Mexico,  and 
Mazatlan,  to  Monterey,  Upper  California,  ostensibly  with  dis 
patches  to  a  consul,  but  really  for  the  purpose  of  presenting  a 
mere  letter  of  introduction  and  a  verbal  request  to  Captain 
John  C.  Fremont,  U.S.A.,  then  on  an  exploring  expedition  to 
the  Pacific  Coast.  The  Lieutenant  found  Fremont  at  the 
north  end  of  the  Great  Klamath  Lake,  Oregon,  in  the  midst 
of  hostile  Indians.  The  letter  being  presented,  Gillespie  ver 
bally  communicated  from  the  Secretary  a  request  for  him  to 
counteract  any  foreign  scheme  on  California,  and  to  cultivate 
the  good-will  of  the  inhabitants  towards  the  United  States. 

On  this  information  Fremont  returned,  in  May,  1846  (the 


Mexican  War  and  Acquisition  of  Territory    71 

month  the  war  opened  on  the  Rio  Grande),  to  the  valley  of 
the  Sacramento.  His  arrival  there  was  timely,  as  already  the 
ever-grasping  hand  of  the  British  was  at  work.  There  had 
been  inaugurated  (i)  the  massacre  of  American  settlers,  (2) 
the  subjection  of  California  to  British  protection,  and  (3)  the 
transfer  of  its  public  domain  to  British  subjects.  Fremont 
did  not  even  know  war  had  broken  out  between  the  United 
States  and  Mexico,  yet  he  organized  at  first  a  defensive  war  in 
the  Sacramento  Valley  for  the  protection  of  American  settlers, 
and  blood  was  shed  ;  then  he  resolved  to  overturn  the  Mexican 
authority,  and  establish  "  California  Independence."  The 
celerity  with  which  this  was  accomplished  was  romantic.  In 
thirty  days  all  Northern  California  was  freed  from  Mexican 
rule — the  flag  of  independence  raised  ;  American  settlers  were 
saved,  and  the  British  party  overthrown. 

Since  its  discovery  by  Sir  Francis  Drake — two  hundred  years 
— England  had  sought  to  possess  the  splendid  Bay  of  Califor 
nia,  with  its  great  seaport  and  the  tributary  country.  The 
war  between  the  United  States  and  Mexico  seemed  her  oppor 
tune  time  for  the  acquisition,  but  her  efforts,  both  by  sea  and 
land,  were  thwarted  by  her  only  less  voracious  daughter.1 

Often  in  human  affairs  events  concur  to  control  or  turn  aside 
the  most  carefully  guarded  plans.  California  and  the  other 
Mexican  acquisitions  were  by  the  war  party — the  slave  propa 
gandists — fore-ordained  to  be  slave  territory.  The  free  State 
men  had  done  little  to  favor  its  theft  and  purchase,  and  it 
was  therefore  claimed  that  they  of  right  should  have  little 
interest  in  its  disposition. 

Just  nine  days  (January  24,  1848)  before  the  treaty  of  peace 
(Guadalupe  Hidalgo),  John  A.  Sutter,  a  Swiss  by  parentage, 
German  by  birth  (Baden),  American  by  residence  and  natural 
ization  (Missouri),  Mexican  in  turn,  by  residence  and  natural 
ization,  together  with  James  W.  Marshall,  a  Jerseyman 
wheelwright  in  Sutter's  employ,  while  the  latter  was  walking 
in  a  newly-constructed  and  recently  flooded  saw-mill  tail-race, 
in  the  small  valley  of  Colona,  about  forty-five  miles  from 

1  Thirty  Years'  View,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  688-692. 


72  Political  History  of  Slavery 

Sacramento  (then  Sutter's  Fort),  in  the  foot-hills  of  the  Sierras, 
picked  up  some  small,  shining  yellow  particles,  which  proved 
to  be  free  gold.1 

The  accursed  thirst  for  gold  "  was  now  soon  to  outrun  the 
accursed  greed  for  more  slave  territory.  The  race  was  unequal. 
The  whole  world  joined  in  the  race  for  gold.  The  hunger 
for  wealth  seized  all  alike,  the  common  laborer,  the  small 
farmer,  the  merchant,  the  mechanic,  the  politician,  the  lawyer 
and  the  clergyman,  the  soldier  and  sailor  from  the  army  and 
navy;  from  all  countries  and  climes  came  the  gold  seeker; 
only  the  slaveholder  with  his  slaves  alone  were  left  behind. 
There  was  no  place  for  the  latter  with  freemen  who  them 
selves  swung  the  pick  and  rocked  the  cradle  in  search  of  the 
precious  metal. 

California,  Nevada,  Colorado,  New  Mexico,  and  Arizona 
still  give  up  their  gold  and  their  silver  to  the  free  miner;  and 
the  financial  condition  and  prosperity  of  the  civilized  countries 
of  the  world  have  been  favorably  affected  by  these  productions ; 
but  of  this  we  are  not  here  to  speak.  Slavery  is  our  text,  and 
we  must  not  stray  too  far  from  it. 

Turning  back  to  the  negotiations  for  the  first  treaty  with 
Mexico,  we  find,  to  her  everlasting  credit,  though  compelled 
to  part  with  her  possessions,  she  still  desired  they  should  con 
tinue  to  be  free. 

Slavery,  as  has  already  been  shown,  did  not  exist  in  Mexico 
bylaw;  and  California  and  New  Mexico  held  no  slaves,  so, 
during  the  negotiations,  the  Mexican  representatives  begged 
for  the  incorporation  of  an  article  providing  that  slavery  should 
be  prohibited  in  all  the  territory  to  be  ceded.  N.  P.  Trist,  the 
American  Commissioner,  promptly  and  fiercely  resented  the 
bare  mention  of  the  subject.  He  replied  that  if  the  territory 
to  be  acquired  were  tenfold  more  valuable,  and  covered  a  foot 
thick  with  pure  gold,  on  the  single  condition  that  slavery  was 
to  be  excluded  therefrom,  the  proposition  would  not  be  for  a 
moment  entertained,  nor  even  communicated  to  the  President.* 

1  Hist.  Ready  Ref.,  vol.  i.,  p.  350. 

2  Trist's  letter  to  Buchanan,  Secretary  of  State,  Von  Hoist,  vol.  iii.,  p.  334. 


Mexican  War  and  Acquisition  of  Territory    73 

Though  the  invocation  was  in  behalf  of  humanity,  the  "  in 
vincible  Anglo-Saxon  race  "  (so  cried  Senator  Preston  in  1836) 
"  could  not  listen  to  the  prayer  of  superstitious  Catholicism, 
goaded  on  by  a  miserable  priesthood." 

Now  that  California  and  New  Mexico  were  United  States 
territory,  how  was  it  to  be  devoted  to  slavery  to  reward  the 
friends  of  its  acquisition  ? 

As  slavery  was  prohibited  under  Mexican  law,  this  territory 
must  by  the  law  of  nations  remain  free  until  slavery  was,  by 
positive  enactment,  authorized  therein.  This  ancient  and  uni 
versal  law,  however,  was  soon  to  be  disregarded  or  denied  by 
the  advocates  of  the  doctrine  that  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States  spread  itself  over  territories,  and,  by  force  of  it, 
legalized  human  slavery  therein,  and  guaranteed  to  citizens  of 
a  State  the  right  to  carry  their  property — human  slaves  in 
cluded — into  United  States  territory  and  there  hold  it,  by  force 
of  and  protected  by  the  Constitution,  in  defiance  of  unfriendly 
territorial  or  Congressional  legislation.  This  novel  claim  also 
sprung  from  the  brain  of  Calhoun,  and  was  met  with  the  true 
view  of  slavery,  to  wit :  that  it  was  a  creature  solely  of  law ; 
that  it  existed  nowhere  of  natural  right ;  that  whenever  a  slave 
was  taken  from  a  jurisdiction  where  slaves  could  be  held  by 
law,  to  one  where  no  law  made  him  a  slave,  his  shackles  fell 
off  and  he  became  a  free  man.  The  soundness  of  the  rule  that 
a  citizen  of  a  State  could  carry  his  personal  property  from  his 
State  to  a  Territory  was  admitted,  but  it  was  claimed  he  could 
not  hold  it  there  if  it  were  not  such  as  the  laws  of  the  Territory 
recognized  as  property.  In  other  words,  he  might  transfer  his 
property  from  a  State  to  a  Territory,  but  he  could  not  take 
with  him  the  law  of  his  State  authorizing  him  to  hold  it  as 
property.  The  law  of  the  situs  is  of  universal  application 
governing  property. 

It  remains  to  briefly  note  the  effort  to  extend  and  interpret 
the  Constitution,  with  the  sole  view  to  establish  and  perpetuate 
human  slavery. 

Near  the  close  of  the  session  of  Congress  (1848-49),    Mr. 

1  Thirty   Years'   View,  vol.  i.,  p.  665. 


74  Political  History  of  Slavery 

Walker  of  Wisconsin,  at  the  instigation  of  Calhoun  moved,  as 
a  rider  on  an  appropriation  bill,  a  section  providing  a  tempo 
rary  government  for  such  Territories,  including  a  provision  to 
"  extend  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  to  the  Territories." 
This  astounding  proposition  was  defended  by  Calhoun,  and, 
with  his  characteristic  straightforwardness,  he  avowed  the  true 
object  of  the  amendment  was  to  override  the  anti-slavery  laws 
of  the  Territories,  and  plant  the  institution  of  slavery  therein, 
beyond  the  reach  of  Congressional  or  territorial  law. 

Mr.  Webster  expounded  the  Constitution  and  combated  the 
newly  brought  forward  slave-extension  doctrine,  but  a  major 
ity  of  the  Senate  voted  for  the  amendment. 

The  House,  however,  voted  down  the  rider,  and  between 
the  two  branches  of  Congress  it  failed.  For  a  time  appropria 
tions  of  necessary  supplies  for  the  government  were  made  to 
depend  on  the  success  of  the  measure.1 

Thus  again  the  newly  acquired  domain  escaped  the  doom  of 
perpetual  slavery. 

But  we  have  done  with  the  Mexican  War  and  the  acquisition 
of  Mexican  territory.  It  remains  to  be  told  how  this  vast 
domain  was  disposed  of.  No  part  of  it  ever  became  slave. 

There  was  not  time  in  Folk's  administration  to  dispose  of 
it.  General  Zachary  Taylor,  the  hero  of  Palo  Alto,  Resaca, 
Monterey,  and  Buena  Vista,  became  President,  March  4,  1849. 
He  was  wholly  without  political  experience  and  had  never  even 
voted  at  an  election.  He  was  purely  a  professional  soldier, 
and  a  Southerner  by  birth  and  training;  was  a  patriot,  pos 
sessed  of  great  common  sense,  and  knew  nothing  of  intrigue, 
and  was  endowed  with  a  high  sense  of  justice,  and  believed  in 
the  rights  of  the  majority.  He  belonged  to  no  cabal  to  pro 
mote,  extend,  or  perpetuate  slavery,  and,  probably,  in  his 
conscience  was  opposed  to  it.  His  Southern  friends  could  not 
use  Him,  and  when  they  demanded  his  aid,  as  President,  to 
plant  slavery  in  California,  he  not  only  declined  to  serve  them, 

1  Historical  Ex.,  etc.,  Dred  Scott  Case,  pp.  151-9.  This  is  the  first  Congress 
where  its  sessions  were  continued  after  twelve  o'clock  midnight,  of  March  3d,  in 
the  odd  years.  Ibid.,  pp.  136-9. 


Compromise  Measures,  1850  75 

but  openly  declared  that  California  should  be  free.  In  differ 
ent  words,  but  words  of  like  import,  he  responded  to  them,  as 
he  did  to  General  Wool,  at  a  critical  moment  in  the  battle  of 
Buena  Vista.  Wool  remarked:  "  General,  we  are  whipped ." 
Taylor  responded:  4<  That  is  for  me  to  determine."  1 

XVI 

COMPROMISE    MEASURES 1850 

The  slavery  agitation  first  began  in  1832  on  a  false  tariff 
issue,  and  precipitated  upon  the  country  in  1835,  on  the  lines 
of  nullification  and  disunion,  was  again  revived  at  the  close  of 
the  Mexican  War,  and  continued  violently  through  1849  an<^ 
1850.  The  year  1850  will  be  ever  memorable  in  the  history 
of  the  United  States  as  a  year  wherein  all  the  baleful  seeds  of 
disunion  were  sown,  which  grew,  to  ripen,  a  little  more  than 
ten  years  later,  into  disunion  in  fact.  Prophetically,  a  leading 
South  Carolina  paper  in  its  New  Year-Day  edition,  said : 

"  When  the  future  historian  shall  address  himself  to  the  task  of 
portraying  the  rise,  progress,  and  decline  of  the  American  Union, 
the  year  1850  will  arrest  his  attention,  as  denoting  and  presenting 
the  first  marshalling  and  arraying  of  those  hostile  forces  and  op 
posing  elements  which  resulted  in  dissolution." 

At  the  close  of  Folk's  administration  an  inflammatory  ad 
dress,  drawn  and  signed  by  Calhoun  and  forty-one  other  mem 
bers  of  Congress  from  the  slave  States,  was  issued,  filled  with 
unfounded  charges  against  the  North,  professing  to  be  a  warn 
ing  to  the  South  that  a  purpose  existed  to  abolish  slavery  and 
bring  on  a  conflict  between  the  white  and  black  races,  and  to 
San  Domingoize  the  South,  which  could  only  be  avoided,  the 
address  states : 

"  By  fleeing  the  homes  of  ourselves  and  ancestors,  and  by  aban 
doning  our  country  to  our  slaves,  to  become  the  permanent  abode 
of  disorder,  anarchy,  poverty,  misery,  and  wretchedness." 
1  Hist,  of  Mexican  IVar  (Wiicox),  p.  223. 


76  Political  History  of  Slavery 

This  manifesto  did  not  go  quite  to  the  extent  of  declaring 
for  a  dissolution  of  the  Union,  but  it  appealed  to  the  South  to 
become  united,  saying,  if  the  North  did  not  yield  to  its  de 
mands,  the  South  would  be  the  assailed,  and 

"Would  stand  justified  by  all  laws,  human  and  divine,  in  repel 
ling  a  blow  so  dangerous,  without  looking  to  consequences,  and  to 
resort  to  all  means  necessary  for  that  purpose."  l 

The  Southern  Press  was  set  up  in  Washington  to  incul 
cate  the  advantages  of  disunion,  and  to  inflame  the  South 
against  the  North.  It  portrayed  the  advantages  which  would 
result  from  Southern  independence;  and  assumed  to  tell  how 
Southern  cities  would  recover  colonial  superiority;  how  ships 
of  all  nations  would  crowd  Southern  ports  and  carry  off  the 
rich  staples,  bringing  back  ample  returns,  and  how  Great  Brit 
ain  would  be  the  ally  of  the  new  "  United  States  South."  In 
brief,  it  asserted  that  a  Southern  convention  should  meet  and 
decree  a  separation  unless  the  North  surrendered  to  Southern 
demands  for  the  extension  of  slavery,  for  its  protection  in  the 
States,  and  for  the  certain  return  of  fugitive  slaves;  it  urged 
also  that  military  preparation  be  made  to  maintain  what  the 
convention  might  decree. 

A  disunion  convention  actually  met  at  Nashville,  near  the 
home  of  Jackson,  but  the  old  hero  was  then  in  his  grave.3  It 
assumed  to  represent  seven  States.  It  invited  the  assembling 
of  a"  Southern  Congress."  South  Carolina  and  Mississippi 
alone  responded  to  this  call.  In  the  Legislature  of  South  Car 
olina  secession  and  disunion  -speeches  were  delivered,  and 
throughout  the  South  public  addresses  were  made,  and  the 
press  advocated  and  threatened  dissolution  of  the  Union  unless 
the  North  yielded  all.3 

All  this  and  more  to  immediately  affect  the  introduction  of 
slavery  into  California  and  New  Mexico.  The  South  saw 
clearly  that  the  free  people  of  the  Republic  were  resolved  that 

1  Thirty  Years'   View,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  733-6. 

2  Jackson  died  June  8,  1845,  Past  seventy-eight  years  of  age. 

3  Thirty   Years'   View,  ii.,  p.  782. 


Compromise  Measures,  1850  77 

there  should  be  no  more  slave  States,  but  believed  that  the 
mercantile,  trading  people,  and  small  farmers  of  the  North 
would  not  fight  for  their  rights,  and  hence  intimidation  seemed 
to  them  to  promise  success. 

It  had  its  effect  on  many,  and,  unfortunately,  on  some  of 
America's  greatest  statesmen. 

By  a  singular  coincidence  the  Thirty-first  Congress,  which 
met  December,  1849,  embraced  among  its  members  Webster, 
Clay,  Calhoun,  Benton,  Cass,  Corwin,  Seward,  Salmon  P. 
Chase,  John  P.  Hale,  Hamlin  of  Maine,  James  M.  Mason, 
Douglas  of  Illinois,  Foote  and  Davis  of  Mississippi,  of  the 
Senate;  and  Joshua  R.  Giddings,  Horace  Mann,  Wilmot  of 
Pennsylvania,  Robert  C.  Schenck,  Robert  C.  Winthrop,  Alex 
ander  H.  Stevens,  and  Thaddeus  Stevens,  of  the  House. 

To  avert  the  impending  storm  of  slavery  agitation  then 
threatening  disunion,  Clay,  by  a  set  of  resolutions,  with  a  view 
to  a  "  lasting  compromise  "  on  January  29,  1850,  proposed  in 
the  Senate  a  general  plan  of  compromise  and  a  committee  of 
thirteen  to  report  a  bill  or  bills  in  accordance  therewith. 

His  plan  was: 

1.  The  admission  of  California  with  her  free  Constitution. 

2.  Territorial  governments  for  the  other  territory  acquired 
from  Mexico,  without  any  restriction  as  to  slavery. 

3.  The  disputed  boundary  between  Texas  and  New  Mexico 
to  be  determined. 

4.  The  bona  fide  public  debt  of  Texas,  contracted  prior  to 
annexation,  to  be  paid  from  duties  on  foreign  imports,  upon 
condition  that  Texas  relinquish  her  claim  to  any  part  of  New 
Mexico. 

5.  The  declaration  that  it  was  inexpedient  to  abolish  slavery 
in  the  District  of  Columbia,  without  the  consent  of  Maryland 
and  the  people  of  the  District,  and  without  compensation  to 
owners  of  slaves. 

6.  The  prohibition   of  the  slave  trade  in  the   District  of 
Columbia. 

7.  A  more  effectual  provision  for  the  rendition  of  fugitive 
slaves. 


78  Political  History  of  Slavery 

8.  A  declaration  that  Congress  has  no  power  to  interfere 
with  the  slave  trade  between  States. 

These  resolutions  and  the  plan  embodied  led  to  a  most  note 
worthy  discussion,  chiefly  participated  in  by  Clay,  Webster, 
Calhoun,  Benton,  Seward,  and  Foote.  The  debate  was  opened 
by  Clay.  He  favored  the  admission  of  California  with  her 
already  formed  free  State  Constitution,  but  he  exclaimed : 

"  I  shall  go  with  the  Senator  from  the  South  who  goes  farthest  in 
making  penal  laws  and  imposing  the  heaviest  sanctions  for  the 
recovery  of  fugitive  slaves  and  the  restoration  of  them  to  their 
owners." 

He,  however,  tried  to  hold  the  olive  branch  to  both  the 
North  and  the  South,  and  pleaded  for  the  Union.  He  pa 
thetically  pleaded  for  mutual  concessions,  and  deprecated, 
what  he  then  apprehended,  war  between  the  sections,  ex 
claiming: 

'  War  and  dissolution  of  the  Union  are  identical." 

After  prophesying  that  if  a  war  came  it  would  be  more  fero 
cious,  bloody,  implacable,  and  exterminating  than  were  the 
wars  of  Greece,  the  Commoners  of  England,  or  the  Revolutions 
of  France,  Senator  Clay  predicted  that  it  would  be  "  not  of 
two  or  three  years'  duration,  but  a  war  of  interminable  dura 
tion,  during  which  some  Philip  or  Alexander,  some  Caesar  or 
Napoleon,  would  arise  and  cut  the  Gordian  knot  and  solve 
the  problem  of  the  capacity  of  man  for  self-government,  and 
crush  the  liberties  of  both  the  several  portions  of  this  common 
empire." 

Happily,  events  have  falsified  most  of  these  prophecies. 

Then  came  the  dying  Calhoun,  with  a  last  speech  in  behalf 
of  slavery  and  on  the  imaginary  wrongs  of  the  South.  His 
last  appearance  in  public  life  was  pathetic.  Broken  with  age 
and  disease,  enveloped  in  flannels,  he  was  carried  to  the  Capi 
tol,  where  he  tottered  to  the  old  Senate  Hall  and  to  a  seat. 
He  found  himself  too  weak  to  even  read  his  last  warning  to  the 
North  and  appeal  for  his  beloved  institution.  The  speech  was 
written,  and  was  read  in  his  presence  by  Senator  Mason  of 


Compromise  Measures,  1850  79 

Virginia.  He  referred  to  the  disparity  of  numbers  between 
the  North  and  the  South  by  which  the  "  equilibrium  between 
the  two  sections  had  been  destroyed."  He  did  not  recognize 
the  fact  that  slavery  alone  was  the  cause  of  this  disparity.  He 
professed  to  believe  the  final  object  of  the  North  was  "  the 
abolition  of  slavery  in  the  States."  He  contended  that  one 
of  the  "  cords  "  of  the  Union  embraced  "  plans  for  disseminat 
ing  the  Bible,"  and  "  for  the  support  of  doctrines  and  creeds." 
He  said : 

"  The  first  of  these  cords  which  snapped  under  its  explosive 
force  was  that  of  the  powerful  Methodist  Episcopal  Church.  The 
next  cord  that  snapped  was  that  of  the  Baptists,  one  of  the  largest 
and  most  respectable  of  the  denominations.  That  of  the  Presbyte 
rian  is  not  entirely  snapped,  but  some  of  its  strands  have  given 
way.  That  of  the  Episcopal  Church  is  the  only  one  of  the  four 
great  Protestant  denominations  which  remains  unbroken  and 
entire." 

He  referred  to  the  strong  ties  which  held  together  the  two 
great  parties,  and  said : 

"  This  powerful  cord  has  fared  no  better  than  the  spiritual.  To 
this  extent  the  Union  has  already  been  destroyed  by  agitation." 

He  laid  at  the  door  of  the  North  all  the  blame  for  the  slavery 
agitation. 

The  admission  of  California  as  a  free  State  was  the  immedi 
ate,  exciting  cause  for  Calhoun's  speech. 

Already,  on  October  13,  1849,  after  a  session  of  forty  days, 
a  Convention  in  California  had,  with  much  unanimity,  framed  a 
Constitution  which,  one  month  later,  was,  with  like  unanimity, 
adopted  by  her  free,  gold-mining  people.  It  prohibited  slav 
ery.  It  had  been  laid  before  Congress  by  President  Taylor, 
who  recommended  the  immediate  admission  under  it  of  Cali 
fornia  as  a  State. 

President  Taylor  had  not  overlooked  the  disunion  move 
ments.  In  his  first  and  only  message  to  Congress  he  expressed 
his  affection  for  the  Union,  and  warningly  said: 


8o  Political  History  of  Slavery 

"  In  my  judgment  its  dissolution  would  be  the  greatest  of  calami 
ties,  and  to  avert  that  should  be  the  study  of  every  American. 
Upon  its  preservation  must  depend  our  own  happiness,  and  that  of 
countless  generations  to  come.  Whatever  dangers  may  threaten  it, 
I  shall  stand  by  it  and  maintain  it  in  its  integrity,  to  the  full  extent 
of  the  obligations  imposed  and  the  power  conferred  on  me  by  the 
Constitution." 

Recommending  specially  that  territorial  governments  for 
New  Mexico  and  Utah  should  be  formed,  leaving  them  to 
settle  the  question  of  slavery  for  themselves,  President  Taylor, 
in  his  Message,  said  further: 

"  I  repeat  the  solemn  warning  of  the  first  and  most  illustrious  of 
my  predecessors  against  furnishing  any  ground  for  characterizing 
parties  by  geographical  discriminations." 

Alluding  to  these  passages,  Calhoun,  in  his  last  speech, 
said : 

"  It  (the  Union)  cannot,  then,  be  saved  by  eulogies  on  it,  how 
ever  splendid  or  numerous.  The  cry  of  *  Union,  Union,  the  glori 
ous  Union,'  can  no  more  prevent  disunion  than  the  cry  of  '  Health, 
Health,  glorious  Health,'  on  the  part  of  the  physician  can  save  a 
patient  from  dying  that  is  lying  dangerously  ill." 

To  the  allusion  of  the  President  to  Washington,  Calhoun 
sneeringly  said : 

"  There  was  nothing  in  his  history  to  deter  us  from  seceding 
from  the  Union  should  it  fail  to  fulfil  the  objects  for  which  it  was 
instituted." 

The  prime  objects  for  which  the  Union  was  formed,  were, 
as  he  contended,  the  preservation,  perpetuation,  and  extension 
of  the  institution  of  human  slavery.  In  the  antithesis  of  this 
speech  he  asked  and  answered : 

"  How  can  the  Union  be  saved  ? 

"  To  provide  for  the  insertion  of  a  provision  in  the  Constitution, 
by  an  amendment  which  will  restore  to  the  South  in  substance  the 


Compromise  Measures,  1850  81 

power  she  possessed  of  protecting  herself  before  the  equilibrium 
between  the  sections  was  destroyed  by  the  action  of  this  govern 
ment." 

The  speech  did  not  state  what,  exactly,  this  amendment 
was  to  be,  but  it  transpired  that  it  was  to  provide  for  the  elec 
tion  of  two  Presidents,  one  from  the  free  and  one  from  the 
slave  States,  each  to  approve  all  acts  of  Congress  before  they 
became  laws. 

Of  this  device,  Senator  Benton  said : 

"  No  such  double-headed  government  could  work  through  even 
one  session  of  Congress,  any  more  than  two  animals  could  work  to 
gether  in  the  plough  with  their  heads  yoked  in  opposite  directions."  ' 

In  the  same  month  (March  31,  1850)  the  great  political 
gladiator  and  pro-slavery  agitator  and  originator  and  dissemi 
nator  of  disunion  doctrines  was  dead 2 ;  but  there  were  others  to 
uphold  and  carry  forward  his  work  to  its  fatal  ending. 

Calhoun  was  early  accounted  a  sincere  and  honest  man,  a 
patriot  of  moderate  views,  and  at  one  time  was  much  esteemed 
North  as  well  as  South.  It  is  believed  that  an  unfortunate 
quarrel  with  President  Jackson  dashed  his  hopes  of  reaching 
the  Presidency,  and  so  embittered  him  that  he  became  the 
champion,  first  of  nullification,  then  of  disunion. 

There  is  not  room  here  to  speak  in  detail  of  the  other 
champions  of  the  great  debate  on  the  Clay  resolutions. 

On  the  1 8th  of  April  these  resolutions,  and  others  of  like 
import,  were  referred  to  a  committee  of  thirteen,  with  Clay  as 
its  chairman.  This  was  Clay's  last  triumph,  and  he  accepted 
it  with  the  greatest  joy,  though  then  in  ill  health  and  fast 
approaching  the  grave.3 

Of  his  joy,  Benton,  in  a  speech  at  the  time,  said : 

1  Thirty   Years'   View,  vol.  ii.,  p.  747. 

2  His  remains  were  entombed  in  St.  Philip's  churchyard,  Charleston,  S.  C.     In 
1865,  on  that  city's  occupancy  by  Union  forces,  friends  seized  and  secreted  them 
from  fancied  desecration  by  the  conquerors. — Draper's  Civil  War  in  Am.,  vol.  i., 

P-  565. 

3  Born  April  12,  1777,  died  June  29,  1852. 

VOL.  i.— 6. 


82  Political  History  of  Slavery 

"  We  all  remember  that  night.  He  seemed  to  ache  with  pleas 
ure.  It  was  too  great  for  continence.  It  burst  forth.  In  the  full 
ness  of  his  joy  and  the  overflow  of  his  heart  he  entered  upon  that 
series  of  congratulations."  ! 

The  sincere  old  hero  was  doomed  to  much  disappointment; 
he  did  not  live,  however,  to  see  his  views  on  slavery  contained 
in  the  Compromise  measures  (i)  overthrown  by  an  act  of 
Congress  four  years  later,  (2)  by  a  decision  of  the  Supreme 
Court  seven  years  later,  and  then  (3)  made  an  issue  on  which 
the  South  seceded  from  the  Union  and  precipitated  a  war,  in 
which  for  ferocity,  duration,  and  bloodshed,  his  prophecies  fell 
far  short.  On  the  8th  of  May  this  memorable  committee  re 
ported  its  recommendations  somewhat  different  from  his  reso 
lutions. 

Its  report  favored : 

1.  The  postponement  of  the  subject  of  the  admission  of  new 
States  formed  out  of  Texas  until  they  present  themselves, 
when    Congress  should  faithfully   execute  the  compact  with 
Texas  by  admitting  them. 

2.  The  admission  forthwith  of  California  with  the  boundaries 
she  claimed. 

3.  The  establishment  of  territorial  government,  without  the 
Wilmot  Proviso,  for  New  Mexico  and   Utah ;   embracing  all 
territory  acquired  from  Mexico  not  included  in  California. 

4.  The  last  two  measures  to  be  combined  in  one  bill. 

5.  The  establishment  of  the  boundary  of  Texas  by  the  ex 
clusion   of  all   New   Mexico,   with  the  grant  of  a  pecuniary 
equivalent  to  Texas;  also  to  be  a  part  of  a  bill  including  the 
last  two  measures. 

6.  A  more  effectual  fugitive-slave  law. 

7.  To  prohibit  the  slave  trade,  not  slavery,  in  the  District 
of  Columbia. 

Bills  to  carry  out  these  recommendations  were  also  reported. 

A  discussion  ensued  in  both  branches  of  Congress,  which 

continued  for  five  months;  and  daily  Clay  met  and  presided 

1  Thirty  Years'  View,  vol.  ii.,  p.  764. 


Compromise  Measures,  1850  83 

in  caucus  over  what  he  called  the  Union  men  of  the  Senate, 
including  Whigs  and  Democrats. 

These  measures  were  supported  by  Clay,  Webster,  Cass, 
Douglas,  and  Foote  ;  opposed  by  Seward,  Chase,  Hale, 
Davis  of  Massachusetts,  and  Dayton,  anti-slavery  men ;  also 
by  Benton,  an  independent  Democrat,  a  slaveholder  in  Mis 
souri  and  the  District  of  Columbia,1  and  by  Jefferson  Davis 
and  others  of  the  Calhoun  Southern  type. 

President  Taylor  opposed  the  Clay  plan.  He  denominated 
the  blending  of  incongruous  subjects  as  an  "  Omnibus  Bill." 
He  favored  dealing  with  each  subject  on  its  merits.  He  re 
garded  the  Texas  and  New  Mexico  boundary  dispute  as  a 
question  between  the  United  States  and  New  Mexico,  not 
between  Texas  and  New  Mexico."  He  favored  the  admission 
of  California  with  her  free  State  Constitution.  Even  earlier, 
he  announced  that  he  would  approve  a  bill  containing  the 
Wilmot  Proviso.  He  indignantly  responded  to  Stephens'  and 
Toombs'  demands  in  the  interests  of  slavery,  coupled  with 
threatened  disunion,  by  giving  them  to  understand  he  would, 
if  necessary,  take  the  field  himself  to  enforce  the  laws,  and  if 
the  gentlemen  were  taken  in  rebellion  he  would  hang  them  as 
he  had  deserters  and  spies  in  Mexico.3 

Taylor  died  (July  8,  1850)  pending  the  great  discussion, 
chagrined  and  mortified  over  the  unsettled  condition  of  his 
country.  His  last  words  were :  "  7  have  always  done  my  duty  : 
I  am  ready  to  die.  My  only  regret  is  for  the  friends  I  leave 
behind  me. ' ' 

He  was  a  great  soldier  and  patriot,  and  his  character  hardly 
justified  the  whole  of  the  common  appellation,  *'  Rough  and 
Ready."  He  was  perhaps  always  ready,  but  not  rough;  on 
the  contrary,  he  was  a  man  of  peace  and  order.  On  his  elec 
tion  to  the  Presidency  he  desired  some  plan  to  be  adopted  for 
California  by  which  "  to  substitute  a  rule  of  law  and  order 
there  for  the  bowie  knife  and  revolver."  4 

1  Thirty  Years'  View,  vol.  ii.,  p.  759.  J  Ibid.,  p.  765. 

3  Hist,  of  the  U.  S.  (Rhodes),  vol  i.,  pp.  134  (190). 

4  Hist.  Pac.  States,  H.  H.  Bancroft,  vol.  xviii.,  p.  262. 


84  Political  History  of  Slavery 

In  August,  1850,  the  great  debate  ceased,  and  voting  in  the 
Senate  commenced.  The  plan  of  the  "  thirteen  "  underwent 
changes,  their  bills  being  segregated,  substitutes  were  offered 
for  them,  and  many  amendments  were  made  to  the  several 
bills.  Davis  of  Mississippi  insisted  upon  the  extension  of  the 
Missouri  Compromise  line — 36°  30' — to  the  Pacific  Ocean. 
This  brought  out  Mr.  Clay's  best  sentiments.  He  said: 

"  Coming  as  I  do  from  a  slave  State,  it  is  my  solemn,  deliberate, 
and  well  matured  determination  that  no  power,  no  earthly  power, 
shall  compel  me  to  vote  for  the  positive  introduction  of  slavery, 
either  south  or  north  of  that  line.  Sir,  while  you  reproach,  and 
justly,  too,  our  British  ancestors  for  the  introduction  of  this  institu 
tion  upon  the  continent  of  America,  I  am,  for  one,  unwilling  that 
the  posterity  of  the  present  inhabitants  of  California  and  New 
Mexico  shall  reproach  us  for  doing  just  what  we  reproach  Great 
Britain  for  doing  for  us." 

The  Wilmot  Proviso  made  its  appearance  for  the  last  time 
when  Seward  offered  it  as  an  amendment.  It  failed  in  the 
Senate  by  a  vote  of  23  to  33. 

Finally,  when  the  bill  for  the  admission  of  California  was 
ready  for  a  vote,  Turney  of  Tennessee  moved  to  limit  the 
southern  boundary  of  the  State  to  36°  30',  so  as  to  allow 
slavery  in  all  territory  south  of  that  line.  This  failed,  24  to 
32,  the  South  voting  almost  unitedly  for  the  amendment. 

Mr.  Benton  was  a  prominent  exception.  To  him  the  friends 
of  freedom  owed  much  for  support,  by  speech  and  vote. 
While  he  opposed  Clay's  plan,  he  voted  with  the  free  State 
party  on  all  questions  of  slavery,  save  on  the  Wilmot  Proviso, 
which  he  deemed  unnecessary  to  the  exclusion  of  slavery  from 
territory  where  the  laws  of  Mexico,  still  in  force,  excluded  it. 

The  California  bill  passed,  August  I3th,  34  to  18.  Clay  is 
not  recorded  as  voting.  He  may  have  been  absent  or  paired. 
Webster  had  become  Secretary  of  State,  and  Winthrop  suc 
ceeded  him  in  the  Senate.  To  emphasize  the  opposition,  ten 
Senators  immediately  had  read  at  the  Secretary's  desk  a  pro 
test,  with  a  view  to  its  being  spread  on  the  Journal.  This  was 


Compromise  Measures,  1850  85 

refused,  after  a  most  spirited  debate,  as  being  against  prece 
dent.1  The  protest  was  a  long  complaint  against  making  the 
Territory  of  California  a  State  without  its  being  first  organized, 
territorially,  and  an  opportunity  given  the  South  to  make  it  a 
slave  State,  and  for  admitting  it  as  a  free  State,  thus  destroy 
ing  the  equilibrium  of  the  States ;  the  protestors  declaring  that 
if  such  course  were  persisted  in,  it  would  lead  to  a  dissolution 
of  the  Union.  A  bill  establishing  New  Mexico  with  its  present 
boundaries,  also  Utah,  was  passed  in  August,  leaving  both  to 
become  States  with  or  without  slavery.  A  fugitive-slave  act 
was  likewise  passed  at  the  same  time  in  the  Senate.  The 
whole  of  the  bills  covered  by  the  compromise  having  in  some 
form  passed  the  Senate,  went  to  the  House,  where,  after  some 
animated  discussion,  they  all  passed,  in  September  following, 
and  were  approved  by  President  Fillmore. 

It  remains  to  speak  briefly  of  the  Fugitive-Slave  Act.  It 
was  odious  to  the  North  in  the  extreme.  United  States  Com 
missioners  were  provided  for  to  act  instead  of  state  magistrates, 
on  whom  jurisdiction  was  attempted  to  be  conferred  by  the 
Act  of  1793.  Ex-parte  testimony  was  made  sufficient  to  deter 
mine  the  identity  of  the  negro  claimed,  and  the  affidavit  of  an 
agent  or  attorney  was  made  sufficient.  The  alleged  fugitive 
was  not  permitted,  under  any  circumstances,  to  testify.  He 
was  denied  the  right  of  trial  by  jury.  The  cases  were  to  be 
heard  in  a  summary  manner.  The  claimant  was  authorized 
to  use  all  necessary  force  to  remove  the  fugitive  adjudged  a 
slave.  All  process  of  any  court  or  judge  was  forbidden  to 
molest  the  claimant,  his  agent  or  attorney,  in  carrying  away 
the  adjudged  slave.  United  States  marshals  and  their  deputies 
were  authorized  to  summon  bystanders  as  a  posse  comitatus ; 
and  all  good  citizens  were  commanded,  by  the  act,  to  aid  and 
assist  in  the  prompt  and  efficient  execution  of  the  law;  all 
under  heavy  penalty  for  failing  to  do  so.  The  officers  were 
liable,  in  a  civil  suit,  for  the  value  of  the  negro  if  he  escaped. 
Heavy  fine  or  imprisonment  was  to  be  imposed  for  hindering 
or  preventing  the  arrest,  or  for  rescuing  or  attempting  to 

1  Thirty  Years'   Vitiv,  vol.  ii.,  p.  770. 


86  Political  History  of  Slavery 

rescue,  or  for  harboring  or  concealing  the  fugitive,  and,  if  any 
person  was  found  guilty  of  causing  his  escape,  a  further  fine  of 
$1000  by  way  of  civil  damages  to  the  owner.  In  case  the 
commissioner  adjudged  the  negro  was  the  claimant's  slave,  his 
fee  was  fixed  at  $10,  and  if  he  discharged  the  negro,  it  was 
only  $5.  The  claimant  had  a  right,  in  case  of  apprehended 
danger,  to  require  the  officer  arresting  the  fugitive  to  remove 
him  to  the  State  from  whence  he  fled,  with  authority  to  em 
ploy  as  many  persons  to  aid  him  as  he  might  deem  necessary, 
the  expense  to  be  paid  out  of  the  United  States  Treasury. 
This  act  became  a  law  September  18,  1850.  The  law  contained 
so  many  odious  provisions  against  all  principles  of  natural 
justice  and  judicial  precedents  that  it  could  not  be  executed 
in  many  places  in  the  North.  The  consciences  of  civilized 
men  revolted  against  it,  and  the  Abolitionists  did  not  fail  to 
magnify  its  injustice;  on  the  other  hand,  the  pro-slavery 
agitators  saw  in  its  imperfect  execution  new  and  additional 
grounds  for  complaint  against  the  North. 

What,  then,  was  intended  to  be  a  settlement  of  the  slavery 
agitation  proved  to  be  really  a  most  violent  reopening  of  it. 

Webster,  like  Clay,  did  not  survive  to  witness  the  next 
great  discussion  in  Congress  on  the  slavery  question,  which  re 
sulted  in  overturning  much  that  was  supposed  to  have  been 
settled;  nor  did  they  live  to  hear  thundered  from  the  supreme 
judicial  tribunal  of  the  Union  the  appalling  doctrines  of  the 
Dred  Scott  decision.  Webster  died  October  24,  1852.  Ben- 
ton  lived  to  condemn  the  great  tribunal  for  this  decision  in 
most  vehement  terms.  He  died  April  10,  1858.  But  few  of 
the  leading  participants  of  the  1850  debates  lived  to  witness 
the  final  overthrow  of  slavery.  Lewis  Cass,  however,  who, 
though  a  Democrat,  generally  followed  and  supported  Clay  in 
his  plan  of  compromise,  not  only  lived  to  witness  the  birth  of 
the  new  doctrine  of  "  Squatter  Sovereignty  "  (and  to  support 
it),  but  to  hear  that  slavery  was,  according  to  our  Supreme 
Court,  almost  national;  then  to  see  disunion  in  the  live  tree  ; 
then  war;  then  slaves  proclaimed  free  as  a  war  measure;  then 
disunion  overthrown  on  the  battle-field ;  then  restoration  of 


Compromise  Measures,  1850  87 

a  more  perfect  Union,  wherein  slavery  and  involuntary  servi 
tude  was  forbidden  by  the  Constitution.1 

In  the  succeeding  Presidential  election  (1852)  the  two  great 
parties  endorsed  the  late  action  of  Congress  in  relation  to  the 
Territories  and  slavery. 

The  Whig  platform  declared  the  acquiescence  of  the  party 
in  all  its  acts:  "  The  act  known  as  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law  in 
cluded,  .  .  .  as  a  settlement  in  principle  and  substance  of 
the  dangerous  and  exciting  questions  which  they  embrace. 
We  will  maintain  them  and  insist  on  their  strict  en 
forcement.  " 

On  this  platform  General  Winfield  Scott  was  nominated  for 
the  Presidency. 

The  Democratic  platform  of  the  same  year,  having  first 
denied  that  Congress  had  power  under  the  Constitution  to  in 
terfere  with  slavery  in  the  States,  declared  also  that  the  party 
would  "  abide  by  and  adhere  to  a  faithful  execution  of  the 
acts  known  as  the  Compromise  measures  settled  by  the  last 
Congress, — the  act  for  reclaiming  fugitives  from  service  or 
labor  included." 

Franklin  Pierce,  of  New  Hampshire,  a  subordinate  officer 
(Brigadier-General)  under  Scott  in  Mexico,  of  no  special  re 
nown,  but  a  polite  and  respectable  gentleman,  was  nominated 
and  elected  on  this  platform  by  a  decided  vote ;  Scott  carrying 
only  Massachusetts,  Vermont,  Kentucky,  and  Tennesseee. 
The  "  Free-Soil  "  party  nominated  John  P.  Hale  of  New 
Hampshire  on  a  platform  repudiating  the  Compromise  meas 
ures,  declaring  against  the  aggressions  of  the  slave  power  and 
for: 

"  No  more  slave  States,  no  slave  territory,  no  nationalized  slavery, 
and  no  national  legislation  for  the  extradition  of  slaves.  That 
slavery  is  a  sin  against  God,  and  a  crime  against  man,  which  no 
human  enactment  or  usage  can  make  right  ;  and  that  Christianity^ 
humanity,  and  patriotism  alike  demand  its  abolition. 

"That  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  of  1850  is  repugnant  to  the  Con 
stitution,  to  the  principles  of  the  common  law,"  etc. 

1  Cass  died  March  17,  1866,  eighty-two  years  of  age. 


88  Political  History  of  Slavery 

The  Whig  party,  with  this  election,  disappeared;  its  great 
leaders  were  dead,  and  it  could  not  vie  with  the  Democratic 
party  in  pro-slavery  principles.  There  was  no  longer  room 
for  two  such  parties.  The  American  people  were  already 
divided  and  dividing  on  the  living  issue  of  freedom  or  slavery. 
Slavery,  like  all  wrong,  was  ever  aggressive,  and  demanded 
new  constitutional  expositions  in  its  interest  by  Congress  and 
the  courts,  and  it  tolerated  no  more  temporizing  or  compro 
mises.  Its  advocates  tried  for  a  time  to  unite  in  the  Democratic 
party. 

XVII 

NEBRASKA     ACT 1854 

Over  the  disposition  of  the  Territory  of  Nebraska  it  remained 
to  have  the  last  Congressional  struggle  for  the  extension  of 
slavery.  This  Territory  in  1854  comprised  what  are  now  the 
States  of  Kansas,  Nebraska,  North  Dakota,  South  Dakota 
and  Montana,  and  parts  of  Colorado  and  Wyoming.  It  was  a 
large  part  of  the  Louisiana  Purchase,  in  area  485,000  square 
miles,  twelve  times  as  large  as  Ohio,  about  ten  times  the  size 
of  New  York,  140,000  square  miles  larger  than  the  original 
thirteen  States,1  and  more  than  four  times  the  area  of  Great 
Britain  and  Ireland.  It  was  what  was  left  of  the  purchase 
after  Louisiana,  Missouri,  Arkansas,  Iowa,  Minnesota,  and 
Indian  Territory  were  carved  out.  It  then  had  only  about 
one  thousand  white  inhabitants. 

The  desire  to  still  placate  the  threatening  South  and  to  win 
its  political  favor,  led  some  great  and  patriotic  men  of  the 
North  to  attempt  measures  in  the  interest  of  slavery. 

On  January  4,  1854,  Stephen  A.  Douglas,  Chairman  of  the 
Senate  Committee  on  Territories,  made  a  report  embodying 
constitutional  theories  not  hitherto  promulgated,  and  question 
ing  or  repudiating  others  long  Supposed  to  have  been  settled. 

The  report  announced  the  discovery  of  a  new  principle  of 
the  Compromise  measures  of  1850. 

1  Area  of  original  thirteen  States,  345,504  square  miles. 


Nebraska  Act,  1854  89 

It  declared : 

"  They  were  intended  to  have  a  far  more  comprehensive  and  en 
during  effect  than  the  mere  adjustment  of  difficulties  arising  out  of 
the  recent  acquisition  of  Mexican  territory.  They  were  designed 
to  establish  certain  great  principles,  which  would  not  only  furnish 
adequate  remedies  for  existing  evils,  but  in  all  time  to  come  avoid 
the  perils  of  similar  agitation  by  withdrawing  the  question  of 
slavery  from  the  halls  of  Congress  and  the  political  arena,  commit 
ting  it  to  the  arbitration  of  those  who  are  immediately  interested  in 
and  alone  responsible  for  its  consequences.  ...  A  question 
has  arisen  in  regard  to  the  right  to  hold  slaves  in  the  Territory  of 
Nebraska.  .  .  .  It  is  a  disputed  point  whether  slavery  is  pro 
hibited  in  the  Nebraska  country  by  valid  enactment.  In  the 
opinion  of  eminent  statesmen  .  .  .  the  eighth  section  of  the  act 
preparatory  to  the  admission  of  Missouri  is  null  and  void." 

The  eighth  section  prohibited  slavery  in  the  Louisiana  Ter 
ritory  north  of  36°  30',  hence  from  the  Nebraska  Territory. 
The  report  reiterated  the  absurd  doctrine : 

"  That  the  Constitution  .  .  .  secures  to  every  citizen  an  in 
alienable  right  to  move  into  any  of  the  Territories  with  his  property, 
of  whatever  kind  and  description,  and  to  hold  and  enjoy  the  same 
under  the  sanction  of  the  law." 

(What  law  ?  The  law  of  the  place  whence  it  came,  or  the 
law  of  the  place  to  which  it  was  taken  ?  Not  even  an  ox  or 
an  ass  can  be  held  as  property  save  under  the  law  of  the  place 
where  it  is;  nor  is  the  title  to  the  soil  valid  except  under  the 
law  of  the  place  where  it  is  located.  As  well  might  a  person 
claim  the  right  to  move  to  a  Territory  and  there  own  the  land 
by  virtue  of  the  Constitution  and  the  laws  of  the  State  of  his 
former  residence  as  to  claim  under  them  the  right  to  own  and 
sell  his  slave  in  a  Territory.  The  difficulty  is,  while  the  emi 
grant  might  take  with  him  his  human  chattel,  he  could  not 
take  with  him  the  law  permitting  him  to  hold  it.) 

The  report  did  not,  however,  as  presented,  propose  to  repeal 
the  Missouri  Compromise  line  that  had  stood  thirty-four  years 


QO  Political  History  of  Slavery 

with  the  approval  of  the  first  statesmen  of  all  parties  in  the 
Union. 

It  assumed  simply  to  interpret  for  the  dead  Clay  and  Web 
ster  their  only  four-year-old  work,  and  ran  thus: 

"The  Compromise  Measures  of  1850  affirm  and  rest  upon  the  fol 
lowing  propositions  : 

"  First — That  all  questions  pertaining  to  slavery  in  the  Territo 
ries,  and  the  new  States  to  be  formed  therefrom,  are  to  be  left  to 
the  decision  of  the  people  residing  therein. 

"  Second — That  *  all  cases  involving  the  title  to  slaves '  and 
'questions  of  personal  freedom  '  are  to  be  referred  to  the  jurisdic 
tion  of  the  local  tribunals,  with  the  right  to  appeal  to  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States. 

:'  Third — That  the  provisions  of  the  Constitution,  in  respect  to 
fugitives  from  service,  are  to  be  carried  into  faithful  execution  in 
all  '  the  organized  Territories,'  the  same  as  in  the  States." 

The  first  of  these  propositions,  in  another  form,  announced 
the  new  doctrine  of  popular  sovereignty,  soon  thereafter  popu 
larly  called  "  Squatter  Sovereignty,"  in  derision  of  the  rights 
thus  to  be  vested  in  the  territorial  squatter,  however  temporary 
his  stay  might  be.  It  was  opposed  to  the  principle  of  Con 
gressional  right  (expressly  granted  by  the  Constitution  ')  to 
provide  rules  (laws)  and  regulations  for  United  States  territory 
until  it  became  clothed  with  statehood. 

The  second  proposition  announced  nothing  new,  as  cases 
involving  titles  to  slaves,  or  questions  of  personal  freedom, 
must  necessarily  go  for  final  determination  to  the  courts,  with 
a  right  of  appeal. 

The  third  proposition,  like  the  second,  was  a  mere  platitude. 

The  bill  accompanying  the  report,  as  first  presented,  required 
that  any  part  of  Nebraska  Territory  admitted  as  a  State  (as 
provided  in  the  New  Mexico  and  Utah  Acts  of  1850)  "  shall 
be  received  into  the  Union  with  or  without  slavery,  as  its  Con 
stitution  may  prescribe  at  the  time  of  admission."  This,  too, 

1  "Congress  shall  have  power  to  dispose  of  and  make  all  needful  rules  and 
regulations  respecting  the  territory  or  other  property  belonging  to  the  United 
States,'  etc.— Art.  IV.,  Sec.  3,  Con.  U.  S. 


Nebraska  Act,  1854  91 

was  not  new  in  any  sense,  as  new  States  had  ever  been  thus 
received.  The  anti-slavery  press  and  societies,  and  all  people 
opposed  to  further  slavery  aggression  and  extension,  at  once 
took  alarm  and  violently  assailed  the  new  doctrines  of  the 
report ;  the  South,  too,  at  first  viewed  them  with  surprise, 
denominating  them  "  a  snare  set  for  the  South,"  yet  later 
regarded  them  as  favorable  to  the  extension  of  slavery. 
Southern  statesmen,  however,  determined  to  force  Douglas 
to  amend  them  so  as  to  accomplish  the  ends  of  the  South. 
Accordingly,  Senator  Dixon  of  Kentucky,  on  January  i6th, 
offered  an  amendment  to  the  Nebraska  Bill  providing  for  the 
absolute  repeal  of  the  Missouri  Compromise  line.  This  amend 
ment  Douglas,  apparently  with  reluctance,1  accepted,  after  a 
consultation  with  Jefferson  Davis,  then  Secretary  of  War,  and 
President  Pierce,  both  of  whom  promised  it  their  support. a 

January  23,  1854,  Douglas  presented  a  substitute  for  his 
original  bill,  \vherein  it  was  provided  that  the  restriction  of  the 
Missouri  Compromise  "  was  superseded  by  the  principles  of 
the  legislation  of  1850,  and  is  hereby  declared  inoperative." 

The  new  bill  divided  the  Territory  in  two  parts ;  the  southern, 
called  Kansas,  lay  between  37°  and  40°  of  latitude,  extending 
west  to  the  Rocky  Mountains,  and  the  northern  was  still  called 
Nebraska. 

As  early  as  1853  a  movement  in  Missouri  was  started, 
avowedly  to  make  Nebraska  slave  Territory,  and  this  was  well 
known  to  Douglas  and  the  supporters  of  his  newly  announced 
doctrines.  Kansas,  lying  farthest  south,  was  climatically  bet 
ter  suited  for  slavery  than  the  new  Nebraska.  Before  the  bill 
passed,  plans  were  made  to  invade  Kansas  from  Missouri  and 
Arkansas  by  slaveholders  with  their  slaves. 

January  24,  1854,  the  Appeal  of  the  Independent  Democrats 
in  Congress  to  the  People  of  the  United  States  was  published. 

Chase  and  Giddings  of  Ohio  were  its  authors ;  some  verbal  ad 
ditions,  however,  were  made  to  it  by  Sumner  and  Gerritt  Smith.* 

1  Tkree  Decades  of  Fed.  Leg.  (Cox),  p.  49. 

2  Rise  and  Fall  Con.  Government  (Davis),  vol.  i.,  p.  28. 

3  Schucker's  Life  of  Chase,  p.  140. 


92  Political  History  of  Slavery 

This  Appeal  was  signed  by  S.  P.  Chase,  Charles  Sumner, 
Joshua  R.  Giddings,  Edward  Wade,  Gerritt  Smith,  and  Alex 
ander  De  Witt ;  three  at  least  of  whom  were  then,  or  soon 
became,  first  among  the  great  statesmen  opposed  to  human 
slavery.  The  Appeal  declared  the  new  Nebraska  Bill  would 
"  open  all  the  unorganized  Territories  of  the  Union  to  the  in 
gress  of  slavery."  A  plot  to  convert  them  "  into  a  dreary 
region  of  despotism,  inhabited  by  masters  and  slaves,"  to  the 
exclusion  of  immigrants  from  the  Old  World  and  free  laborers 
from  our  own  States.  It  reviewed  the  history  of  Congres 
sional  legislation  on  slavery  in  the  Territories,  reciting,  among 
other  things,  that  President  Monroe  approved  the  Missouri 
Compromise  after  his  Cabinet  had  given  him  a  written  opinion 
that  the  section  restricting  slavery  was  constitutional. 

John  Quincy  Adams,  Secretary  of  State,  John  C.  Calhoun, 
Secretary  of  War,  Wm.  H.  Crawford,  Secretary  of  the  Treas 
ury,  and  Wm.  Wirt,  Attorney-General — three  from  slave  States 
— then  constituted  Monroe's  Cabinet. 

The  Appeal  warningly  proceeded: 

"  The  dearest  interests  of  freedom  and  the  Union  are  in  immi 
nent  peril.  Demagogues  may  tell  you  that  the  Union  can  be  main 
tained  only  by  submitting  to  the  demands  of  slavery.  We  tell  you 
that  the  Union  can  only  be  maintained  by  the  full  recognition  of 
the  just  claims  of  freedom  and  man.  When  it  fails  to  accomplish 
these  ends  it  will  be  worthless,  and  when  it  becomes  worthless  it 
cannot  long  endure.  .  .  .  Whatever  apologies  may  be  offered 
for  the  toleration  of  slavery  in  the  States,  none  can  be  offered  for 
its  extension  into  the  Territories  where  it  does  not  exist,  and 
where  that  extension  involves  the  repeal  of  ancient  law  and  the 
violation  of  solemn  compact. 

"  For  ourselves,  we  shall  resist  it  by  speech  and  vote,  and  with  all 
the  abilities  which  God  has  given  us.  Even  if  overcome  in  the  im 
pending  struggle,  we  shall  not  submit.  We  shall  go  home  to  our 
constituents,  erect  anew  the  standard  of  freedom,  and  call  on  the 
people  to  come  to  the  rescue  of  the  country  from  the  domination  of 
slavery.  We  will  not  despair  ;  for  the  cause  of  human  freedom  is 
the  cause  of  God." 


Nebraska  Act,  1854  93 

These  patriotic  expressions  electrified  the  whole  country. 
The  North  was  aroused  to  their  truth,  the  South  seized  upon 
them  as  threats  of  disunion,  and  still  louder  than  before,  if 
possible,  called  for  a  united  South  to  vindicate  slavery's  rights 
in  the  Territories.  Douglas  attempted  in  the  Senate  to  an 
swer  the  Appeal.  This  led  to  an  acrimonious  debate,  partici 
pated  in  by  Chase,  Sumner,  Seward,  Everett,  and  others,  too 
long  to  be  reviewed  here. 

Senator  Benjamin  F.  Wade,  of  Ohio,  took  a  prominent  part 
in  the  memorable  debate  over  the  Douglas-N.ebraska  Bill. 
He  was  bold,  and  never  dealt  in  sophistry,  but  in  plain  speech. 

Mr.  Badger,  of  North  Carolina,  while  making  a  slavery- 
dilution  argument,  appealingly  said: 

"Why,  if  some  Southern  gentleman  wishes  to  take  the  nurse  who 
takes  charge  of  his  little  baby,  or  the  old  woman  who  nursed  him 
in  childhood,  and  whom  he  called  '  Mammy  '  until  he  returned  from 
college,  .  .  .  and  whom  he  wishes  to  take  with  him  .  .  .  into 
one  of  these  new  Territories,  .  .  .  why,  in  the  name  of  God,  should 
anybody  prevent  it  ? " 

Mr.  Wade  responded : 

'*  The  Senator  entirely  mistakes  our  position.  We  have  not  the 
least  objection,  and  would  oppose  no  obstacle  to  the  Senator's  mi 
grating  to  Kansas  and  taking  his  old  '  Mammy  '  along  with  him. 
We  only  insist  that  he  shall  not  be  empowered  to  sell  her  after 
taking  her  there." 

Mr.  Chase  moved  to  amend  the  bill  by  adding  the  words: 

"  Under  which  the  people  of  the  Territories,  through  their  appro 
priate  representatives,  may,  if  they  see  fit,  prohibit  the  existence  of 
slavery  therein." 

This  amendment  failed,  but  it  served  to  test  the  good  faith 

o 

of  those  who  supported  the  squatter  sovereignty  feature  of  the 
bill. 

After  a  long  struggle  the  bill  passed,  and  was  approved  by 
the  President  in  May,  1854. 


94  Political  History  of  Slavery 

XVIII 

KANSAS'  STRUGGLE  FOR  FREEDOM 

The  storm  that  arose  over  the  Nebraska  Act  was  ominous 
of  the  future.  Public  meetings  in  New  York  and  other  great 
cities  of  the  North  were  held,  where  it  and  slavery  were  de 
nounced.  The  clergyman  from  the  pulpit,  the  orator  from 
the  rostrum,  and  the  great  press  of  the  North  vehemently 
denounced  the  measure.  Anti-slavery  movements  appeared 
everywhere. 

And  as  Kansas  was  thrown  open  to  settlement,  with  Mis 
souri  slaveholders  already  moved  and  organized  to  move  in 
and  take  possession  of  and  dedicate  it  to  slavery  under  the 
new  doctrine  of  Popular  Sovereignty,  emigration  at  once  com 
menced  from  the  North,  encouraged  and  promoted  by  aid 
societies. 

Douglas,  in  the  next  Congress  (March,  1856),  as  Chairman 
of  the  Committee  on  Territories,  made  a  report  on  Kansas 
affairs,  condemning  the  action  of  the  free  State  people  and  of 
the  aid  societies,  referring  specially  to  an  imaginary  "  Emi 
gration  Aid  Company  "  of  Massachusetts,  with  a  capital  of 
$5,000,000,  and  in  consequence  holding  their  existence  justi 
fied  the  Border  Ruffians  of  Missouri.  The  crack  of  the  rifle 
was  soon  to  be  heard  on  the  plains  of  Kansas. 

The  first  election  in  Kansas  was  held  in  November,  1854, 
when,  by  fraud  and  violence,  Whitfield,  a  pro-slavery  man, 
was  elected  delegate  to  Congress.  Non-residents  from  Mis 
souri  cast  the  majority  of  the  votes  at  this  election.  Though 
not  of  the  requisite  population,  this  was  regarded  as  the  op 
portune  time  for  Kansas'  admission  as  a  slave  State.  Doug 
las  in  his  report  so  recommended. 

The  House,  the  political  complexion  of  which  had  changed 
at  the  recent  election,  appointed  Howard  of  Michigan,  Sher 
man  of  Ohio,  and  Oliver  of  Missouri  a  special  committee  to 
investigate  the  Kansas  outrages  and  election  frauds. 

A   majority    of   this   committee,    July    i,    1856,    reported, 


Kansas'  Struggle  for  Freedom  95 

showing  in  a  most  conclusive  way  that  frauds  and  outrages 
had  been  perpetrated  to  control  the  several  Kansas  elections. 

From  this  report  it  appeared  that  in  February,  1855,  the 
total  population  of  Kansas  was  8501  ;  slaves  242,  free  negroes 
151.  A  lengthy  debate  ensued  over  the  report  and  over  Kan 
sas  affairs,  Wade,  Seward,  Sumner,  and  others  participating. 

Presidents  Pierce  and  Buchanan  successively  appointed  gov 
ernor  after  governor  of  their  party — Reeder,  Shannon,  Geary, 
Walker,  Stanton — all  of  whom  resigned  or  were  removed 
because  they  each  failed  to  support  or  endorse  the  determined 
and  fraudulent  efforts  to  make  Kansas  a  slave  State  against 
the  will  of  the  majority  of  the  resident  people.  Hon.  J.  W. 
Denver  of  Ohio,  a  sensible,  quiet  man,  was  the  last  of  this  long 
line  of  governors.  One  of  them,  Andrew  Reeder,  who  was 
indicted  with  others  for  high  treason  on  the  ground  of  their 
participation  in  the  organization  of  a  free  State  government 
under  the  Topeka  Constitution,  for  fear  of  assassination  fled 
the  Territory  in  disguise.  Robert  J.  Walker,  though  himself 
pro-slavery,  firmly  refused  to  participate  in  forcing  the  Le- 
compton  Constitution  on  Kansas,  even  after  President  Bu 
chanan,  at  the  demand  of  his  pro-slavery  party  friends,  had 
decided  Kansas  should  be  admitted  under  it  without  its  sub 
mission  to  a  vote  of  the  people.  This  Constitution  was  framed 
at  Lecompton  by  fraudulently  elected  delegates  to  a  pro-slavery 
convention,  and  it  provided  for  perpetual  slavery  in  the  State. 
In  Governor  Walker's  letter  of  resignation,  December  16,  1857, 
he  said : 

"  I  state  it  as  a  fact     .     .      .     that  an  overwhelming  majority  of 

the  people  (of  Kansas)  are  opposed  to  the  Lecompton  Constitution, 

.     .      but  one  out  of  twenty  of  the  press  of  Kansas  sustains  it. 

Any  attempt  by  Congress  to  force  this  Constitution  upon 

the  people  of  Kansas  will  be  an  effort  to  substitute  the  will  of  a 

small  minority  for  that  of  an  overwhelming  majority  of  the  people." 

It  is  due  to  Douglas  to  say  that  he  was  opposed  to  the 
Lecompton  Constitution  scheme  of  admission.  He  was  doubt 
less  disappointed  in  not  having  the  South  rally  to  his  support 


96  Political  History  of  Slavery 

and  nominate  him  for  President  in  1856.  A  more  pliant  tool 
of  the  pro-slavery  party  from  the  North  was  given  the  prefer 
ence  in  the  person  of  Buchanan. 

President  Buchanan,  having  early  expressed  the  purpose  to 
support  the  Lecompton  plan,  announced  this  purpose  to  Doug 
las,  and  urged  him  to  co-operate  in  admitting  Kansas  as  a 
State  under  it,  which,  being  refused,  terminated  their  party 
relations.  Douglas  did  not  go  far  enough.  Popular  Sover 
eignty  was  only  recognized  by  pro-slavery  advocates  when  it 
insured  the  success  of  slavery ;  and  it  was  now  certain  to  make 
Kansas  a  free  State  if  the  actual  settlers  alone  were  permitted 
to  vote  unintimidated  and  their  votes  were  honestly  counted 
and  returned. 

On  December  9,  1857,  Douglas,  almost  heroically,  in  oppo 
sition  to  President  Buchanan  and  his  administration  and  the 
majority  of  his  party  in  the  Senate,  denounced  the  Lecompton 
scheme,  and  showed  that  it  was  an  attempt  to  foist  slavery  on 
Kansas  against  the  will  of  the  people. 

The  peculiar  feature  of  the  Lecompton  Constitution  was 
that,  while  it  was  submitted  to  the  vote  of  the  people  of  Kan 
sas,  they  were  required  to  vote  for  it  or  not  vote  at  all.  The 
ballot  provided  required  them  to  vote  "  For  the  Constitution 
with  Slavery,"  or  "  For  the  Constitution  without  Slavery." 
Thus  the  Constitution  must  be  adopted,  and  necessarily  with 
slavery,  as  there  was  no  provision  for  excluding  the  clauses 
authorizing  it.  At  an  election,  where  for  fraud  and  violence 
nothing  thitherto  had  approached  it,  and  by  the  special  feature 
of  ballot-box  stuffing  (actual  settlers  generally  being  driven 
from  the  polls  when  willing  to  vote),  this  Constitution  was 
returned  adopted  by  about  6000  majority  in  favor  of  slavery.1 

The  Senate,  March  23,  1858,  passed  (33  to  25)  a  bill  to 
admit  Kansas  as  a  State  under  the  Lecompton  Constitution, 
with  slavery;  but  notwithstanding  the  active  efforts  of  the  Ad- 

1  From  one  election,  held  in  1857  at  Oxford,  Kansas,  a  roll  was  returned  on 
which  1624  persons'  names  appeared  which  had  been  copied  in  alphabetical  order 
from  a  Cincinnati  directory.  These  persons  were  reported  as  voting  with  the 
pro-slavery  party. 


Kansas'  Struggle  for  Freedom  97 

ministration,  the  House  (120  to  112)  so  amended  the  Senate 
bill  as  to  require  it,  before  the  State  was  admitted,  to  be  voted 
on  by  the  people,  the  ballot  to  be — "  For  the  Constitution  " 
or  "Against  the  Constitution."  This  amendment  the  Senate 
reluctantly  concurred  in. 

On  January  4,  1858,  according  to  an  act  of  the  Territorial 
Legislature,  a  vote  was  again  taken  and,  notwithstanding  many 
temptations  offered  in  lands,  etc.,  and  the  desire  for  statehood, 
this  Constitution  was  rejected  by  over  10,000  majority. 

February  n,  1859,  tne  Territorial  Legislature  authorized 
another  convention  to  form  a  constitution.  Fifty-two  dele 
gates  were  elected,  and  they  met  July  5,  1859,  at  Wyandotte, 
and  on  the  2/th  adjourned  after  framing  a  constitution  pro 
hibiting  slavery,  and  limiting  and  establishing  the  western 
boundary  of  Kansas  as  it  now  is.  This  Constitution  was  ratified 
at  an  election  held  in  October  following.  April  IIT  1860,  the 
House  of  Representatives  passed  a  bill  (134  to  73)  for  the 
admission  of  Kansas  under  this  Wyandotte  Constitution,  but 
a  similar  bill  failed  in  the  Senate,  and  both  Houses  adjourned, 
still  leaving  Kansas  a  Territory. 

January  29,  1861,  when  secession  had  depleted  Congress  of 
many  members,  Kansas  was  admitted  under  the  Wyandotte 
Constitution — a  free  State. 

This  last  struggle  for  slavery  extension  was  by  no  means 
bloodless.  The  angry  flash  of  Sharp's  rifles  was  seen  on  the 
plains;  the  Bible  and  the  shot-gun  were  companions  of  the 
free  State  advocate,  and  many  were  the  daring  deeds  of  men, 
and  women,  too,  to  save  fair  Kansas  to  liberty.  John  Brown 
(Osawatomie)  here  first  became  famous  for  his  zeal  in  the 
cause  of  freedom ;  and  it  is  said  he  did  not  fail  to  retaliate, 
blood  for  blood,  man  for  man. 

Douglas,  who,  by  his  "  Popular  Sovereignty  "  invention, 
brought  on  the  contest  over  Kansas  which  came  so  near  making 
it  slave,  lived  to  see  his  new  doctrine  fail  in  practice,  but  first 
to  be  cast  down  by  the  Supreme  Court,  as  we  shall  presently  see. 

Douglas,  however,  cannot,  in  justice  to  him,  be  thus  care 
lessly  dismissed.  After  being  defeated  in  the  previous  election, 

VOL.    I.— 7 


98  Political  History  of  Slavery 

he  held  his  great  opponent's  hat  when  the  latter  was  inaugu 
rated  President,  and  gave  him  warm  assurance  of  support  in 
maintaining  the  Union,  personally  and  by  speech  and  votes 
in  Congress;  and,  on  the  war  breaking  out,  in  April,  1861,  he 
proclaimed  to  the  people,-  from  the  political  rostrum,  that 
"  there  are  now  only  two  parties  in  this  country:  patriots  and 
traitors"  He  appealed  to  his  past  party  friends  to  stand  by 
the  Union  and  fight  for  its  integrity,  come  what  might.  But 
he,  too,  did  not  live  to  see  the  triumph  of  freedom  and  of  his 
country.  He  died  June  3,  1861. 

It  is  believed  by  many  that  if  slavery  had  been  forced  upon 
California  and  into  the  New  Mexico  and  Nebraska  Territories 
four  more  slave  States  would  soon  have  been  admitted  from 
Texas  (as  the  act  of  annexation  provided),  and  that  thus  the 
slave  power  having  secured  such  domination  in  the  Union  as 
was  desired  and  expected  by  its  leaders,  there  would  have  been 
no  secession, — no  rebellion,  but,  instead,  slavery  would  have 
become  national. 

But  with  California  free  and  Kansas  free,  all  hope  of  further 
extending  slavery  in  the  United  States  was  forever  gone. 

Had  Kansas  even  become  slave,  what  then  ? 

The  final  contest  in  Kansas  was  augmented  and  intensified 
by  a  national  event  partly  passed  over. 

During  the  Kansas  struggle  the  excitement  of  debate  in 
Congress  rose  to  its  zenith,  surpassing  any  other  period. 

The  North  had  been  bullied  into  a  frenzy  over  the  demands 
of  those  desiring  the  extension  of  slavery.  The  anti-slavery 
members  of  Congress  met  this  in  many  instances  by  sober, 
candid  discussion,  but  in  others  by  sharp  invectives,  dealt  out 
by  superior  learning  and  consummate  skill  in  the  use  of  the 
English  language. 

Charles  Sumner  of  Massachusetts  was  a  profound  student 
and  scholar,  and  an  inveterate  hater  of  slavery  and  all  that  was 
incident  to  it. 

On  May  19  and  20,  1856,  he  pronounced  his  famous  philip 
pic  against  slavery  and  its  supporters.  Regarding  the  opening 
of  the  Kansas-Nebraska  Territory  to  the  influx  of  slavery,  and 


Kansas'  Struggle  for  Freedom  99 

the  evident  purpose  of  the  Administration  to  dedicate  it  to 
slavery,  he  poured  out  warning  invectives  against  all  who  in 
any  way  favored  the  new  policy  of  opening  this  Territory  to 
the  chance  of  coming  into  the  Union  as  slave  States.  Mr. 
Sumner's  remarks  were  personal  in  the  extreme,  only  justified 
by  the  general  dictatorial  and  bullying  attitude  of  some 
Southern  Senators.  A  mere  extract  here  would  do  him  and 
the  occasion  injustice.  Senators  Cass  and  Douglas,  on  the 
floor  of  the  Senate,  resented  this  speech  of  Sumner. 

On  the  22d  of  May,  two  days  after  the  speech,  at  the  close 
of  a  session  of  the  Senate,  while  Sumner  was  seated  at  his 
desk  in  the  Senate  chamber  writing,  he  was  approached  by 
Preston  Brooks,  a  member  of  the  House  from  South  Carolina, 
who  accosted  him  :  "  I  have  read  your  speech  twice  over  care 
fully.  It  is  a  libel  on  South  Carolina  and  Mr.  Butler,  who  is  a 
relative  of  mine,"  and  he  forthwith  assaulted  Mr.  Sumner 
by  blows  on  the  head  with  a  gutta-percha  cane  one  inch  in 
diameter  at  the  larger  end.  The  blows  were  repeated,  the 
cane  broken,  and  Brooks  still  continued  to  strike  with  the 
broken  parts  of  it.  Sumner,  thus  taken  by  surprise,  and  being 
severely  injured,  could  not  defend  himself,  and  soon,  after  vain 
efforts  to  protect  himself,  fell  prostrate  to  the  floor,  covered 
with  his  own  blood.  He  was  severely  injured,  and  though  he 
lived  for  many  years,  he  never  wholly  recovered  from  the  in 
juries.  He  died  March  11,  1874. 

This  outrage  did  much  to  precipitate  events  and  to  intensify 
hostility  to  slavery.  Southern  Senators  and  Representatives 
assumed  to  justify  the  assault.1 

The  House  did  not  expel  Brooks,  as  the  requisite  two  thirds 
vote  was  not  obtained.  He  resigned,  and  was  re-elected  by 
his  district,  six  votes  only  being  cast  against  him,  but  he  died 
in  January,  1857.  Butler,  of  South  Carolina,  the  alleged  im 
mediate  cause  of  Brooks'  assault  on  Sumner,  died  in  the  same 
year. 

1  Keitt  of  South  Carolina  and  Edmundson  of  Virginia  stood  by  during  the 
assault,  in  a  menacing  manner,  to  protect  Brooks  from  assistance  that  might  come 
to  Sumner. 


TOO  Political  History  of  Slavery 

The  whole  North  looked  upon  the  personal  assault  upon 
Sumner  as  not  only  brutal,  but  as  intended  to  be  notice  to 
other  Senators  and  members  of  Congress  of  a  common  design 
and  plan  to  intimidate  the  friends  of  freedom.  The  assault 
was  largely  justified  throughout  the  South,  also  by  leading 
Southern  statesmen  in  both  branches  of  Congress.1 

Remarks  on  the  manner  of  Brook's  assault  in  the  House 
made  by  Burlingame  of  Massachusetts  led  to  a  challenge  from 
Brooks,  which  was  accepted,  the  duel  to  be  fought  near  the 
Clifton  House,  Canada ;  but  Brooks  declined  to  fight  at  the  place 
named,  alleging  a  fear  to  go  there  through  the  enraged  North. 

Brooks  also,  for  remarks  in  the  Senate  characterizing  the 
assault,  challenged  Henry  Wilson  of  Massachusetts,  but  the 
latter  declined  the  challenge  because  he  "  regarded  duelling  as 
the  lingering  relic  of  a  barbarous  civilization,  which  the  law 
of  the  country  has  branded  as  a  crime."  ' 

So  threatening,  then,  was  the  attitude  of  the  Southern  mem 
bers  of  both  Senate  and  House  that  Senators  Wade  of  Ohio, 
Chandler  of  Michigan,  and  Cameron  of  Pennsylvania  made  a 
compact  to  resent  any  insult  from  a  Southerner  by  a  challenge 
to  fight.2 

A  last  attempt  was  made  in  Buchanan's  administration, 
pending  the  Kansas  agitation,  to  buy  and  annex  Cuba  iti  the 
interest  of  the  slave  power.  It  was  then  a  province  of 
Spain.  Buchanan  was  both  dull  and  perverse  in  obeying 
the  demands  of  his  party,  especially  on  the  slavery  issue. 
In  his  Annual  Message  of  1858  he  expressed  satisfaction  that 
the  Kansas  question  no  longer  gave  the  country  trouble.  He 
also  expressed  gratitude  to  "  Almighty  Providence  "  that  it 
no  longer  threatened  the  peace  of  the  country,  and  congratu 
lated  himself  over  his  course  in  relation  to  the  Lecompton 
policy,  saying,  "  it  afforded  him  heartfelt  satisfaction."  He, 
in  the  same  message,  set  forth  his  anxiety  to  acquire  Cuba, 
assigning  as  a  reason  that  it  was  "  the  only  spot  in  the  civilized 
world  where  the  African  slave  trade  is  tolerated." 

1  Life  of  Sumner  (Lesten),  pp.  250,  etc. 

a  Appleton's  Cyclop.  Am.  Biography,  vol.  vi.,  p.  311. 


Kansas'  Struggle  for  Freedom  101 

Cuba  was  wanted  simply  to  make  more  slave  States  to  ex 
tend  the  waning  slave  power,  and  this  to  offset  the  incoming 
new  free  States,  which  then  seemed  to  the  observing  as  inevit 
able. 

Buchanan  suggested  that  circumstances  might  arise  where 
the  law  of  self-preservation  might  call  on  us  to  acquire  Cuba 
by  force,  thus  affirming  the  policy  set  forth  in  the  Ostend 
Manifesto,  prepared  and  signed  by  Mason,  Soule,  and  himself 
four  years  earlier. 

Slidell  of  Louisiana,  from  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Affairs 
of  the  Senate,  promptly  reported  a  bill  appropriating  $30,000,- 
ooo  to  be  used  by  the  President  to  obtain  Cuba;  and  it  soon 
transpired  that  Southern  Senators  were  willing  to  make  the 
sum  $120,000,000. 

The  introduction  of  the  bill  caused  a  sensation  in  Spain,  and 
her  Cortes  voted  at  once  to  support  her  King  in  maintaining 
the  integrity  of  the  Spanish  dominions. 

A  most  violent  debate  ensued  in  Congress,  reopening  afresh 
the  slavery  question. 

The  bill  was  antagonized  by  the  friends  of  a  homestead  bill 
— "  A  question  of  homes;  of  lands  for  the  landless  freemen." 
The  friends  of  the  latter  bill  denominated  the  Cuba  bill  a 
"  question  of  slaves  for  the  slaveholders." 

Toombs  of  Georgia,  ever  a  fire-eater,  save  in  war,1  vehemently 
denounced  the  opponents  of  the  Cuba  appropriation  and  the 
friends  of"  lands  for  the  landless"  as  the  "  shivering  in  the 
wind  of  men  in  particular  localities."  This  brought  to  his  feet 
Senator  Wade  of  Ohio,  impetuous  to  meet  attacks  from  all 
quarters,  who  exclaimed : 

"  I  am  very  glad  this  question  has  at  length  come  up.  I  am  glad, 
too,  it  has  antagonized  with  the  nigger  question.  We  are  *  shiver 
ing  in  the  wind/  are  we,  sir,  over  your  Cuba  question  ?  You  may- 
have  occasion  to  shiver  on  that  question  before  you  are  through 
with  it.  The  question  will  be,  shall  we  give  niggers  to  the  nigger- 
less,  or  land  to  the  landless,  etc.  .  .  .  When  you  come  to  niggers 

1  Manassas  to  Appomattox  (Longstreet),  pp.  113,  161. 


102  Political  History  of  Slavery 

to    the    niggerless,    all    other    questions    sink    into    perfect    insig 
nificance."  l 

Although  a  majority  of  the  Senate  seemed  to  favor  the  bill, 
Mr.  Slidell  withdrew  it  after  much  discussion,  declaring  it  was 
then  impracticable  to  press  it  to  a  final  vote. 

The  once  famous  Ostend  Manifesto,  dated  October  18,  1854, 
was  a  remarkable  document,  prepared  and  signed  by  Pierre 
Soule,  John  Y.  Mason,  and  James  Buchanan,  then  Ministers, 
respectively,  to  Spain,  France,  and  England,  at  a  conference 
held  at  Ostend  and  Aix-la-Chapelle,  France.  It  assumed  to 
offer  $120,000,000  for  Cuba,  and,  if  this  were  refused,  it  an 
nounced  that  it  was  the  duty  of  the  United  States  to  apply 
the  "  great  law"  of  "  self-preservation  "  and  take  Cuba  in 
"  disregard  of  the  censures  of  the  world."  The  further  excuse 
stated  in  the  Manifesto  was  that  "  Cuba  was  in  danger  of  being 
Africanized  and  become  a  second  St.  Domingo." 

The  real  purpose,  however,  was  to  acquire  it,  and  then 
admit  it  into  the  Union  as  two  or  more  slave  States. 

Buchanan,  as  Secretary  of  State  under  Polk,  had  offered 
$100,000,000  for  Cuba.  His  efforts  to  obtain  Cuba  secured 
for  him  the  support  of  the  South  for  President  in  1856. 

There  was  no  special  instance  of  acquiring  or  attempting  to 
acquire  territory  by  the  United  States  authorities  to  dedicate 
to  freedom. 

Cuba  is  still  Spanish  (though  not  slave)  *  and  just  now  in  the 
throes  of  insurrection,  and  the  Congress  of  the  United  States 
has  just  voted  (April,  1896)  to  grant  the  Cuban  Provisional 
Government  belligerent  rights.3 

1  In  1862  the  first  homestead  bill  became  a  law,  under  which,  by  July  30,  1878, 
homesteads  were  granted  to  the  number  of  384,848  ;  in  area,  61,575,680  acres,  or 
96,212  square  miles  ;  greater  in  extent  by  7000  square  miles  than  England,  Wales, 
and  Scotland. 

2  In  1870  the  Spanish  Government  enacted  a  law  emancipating  all  slaves  in  Cuba 
over  sixty  years  of  age,  and  declaring  all  free  who  were  born  after  the  enactment. 
In  1886  but  25,000  slaves  remained,  and  these  were  emancipated  en  masse  by  a  de 
cree  of  the  Spanish  Cortes.     The  last  vestige  of  slavery  (the  patronato  system)  was 
swept  away  by  a  royal  decree  dated  October  7,  1886. 

3  But  see  Service  in  Spanish  War,  Appendix,  A. 


Dred  Scott  Decision  103 

XIX 

DRED    SCOTT    CASE — 1857 

On  March  6,  1857,  two  days  after  Buchanan  was  inaugurated 
President  of  the  United  States,  the  famous  Dred  Scott  case 
was  decided. 

Chief-Justice  Taney  of  Maryland,  Justices  Wayne  of  Georgia, 
Catron  of  Tennessee,  Daniel  of  Virginia,  Campbell  of  Alabama, 
Grier  of  Pennsylvania,  and  Nelson  of  New  York  concurred  in 
the  decision,  though  some  of  them  only  in  a  qualified  way. 

Chief-Justice  Taney  read  the  opinion  of  the  court. 

Justices  McLean  of  Ohio  and  Curtis  of  Massachusetts  dis 
sented  on  all  points.  All  the  justices  read  opinions  at  length.1 

Chief-Justice  Taney  was  a  devout  Roman  Catholic,  given 
much  to  letters,  of  great  industry,  and  generally  regarded  a 
great  jurist.  When  the  case  was  decided  he  was  nearly  eighty 
years  of  age,  and  he  was  then,  in  the  distracted  condition  of 
the  country,  deeply  imbued  with  the  idea  that  the  Supreme 
Court  had  the  power  to  and  could  settle  the  slavery  question. 

All  the  other  justices  were  eminent  jurists  and  men  of 
learning. 

The  decision  reached  marked  an  epoch  in  American  history, 
and  it  gave  slavery  an  apparent  perpetual  lease  of  life;  this 
was,  however,  only  apparent. 

The  case  was  twice  argued  by  eminent  lawyers ;  Blair  and  G. 
F.  Curtis  for  Dred  Scott,  and  by  Geyer  and  Johnson  for  the 
defendant. 

Dred  Scott  brought  a  suit  in  the  United  States  Circuit  Court 
in  Missouri  for  trespass  against  one  Sanford,  charging  him  with 
assault  on  him,  his  wife,  and  two  children — in  fact,  for  his  and 
their  freedom. 

The  facts,  as  agreed,  were  as  follows: 

"  In  the  year  1834,  the  plaintiff  (Dred  Scott)  was  a  negro  slave 
belonging  to  Dr.  Emerson,  who  was  a  surgeon  in  the  army  of  the 
United  States.  In  that  year,  1834,  said  Dr.  Emerson  took  the 

'igth  Howard  (U.  S.),  pp.  393-633. 


104  Political  History  of  Slavery 

plaintiff  from  the  State  of  Missouri  to  the  military  post  at  Rock 
Island,  in  the  State  of  Illinois,  and  held  him  there  as  a  slave  until 
nhe  month  of  April  or  May,  1836.  At  the  time  last  mentioned,  said 
Dr.  Emerson  removed  the  plaintiff  from  said  military  post  at  Rock 
Island  to  the  military  post  at  Fort  Snelling,  situate  on  the  west 
bank  of  the  Mississippi  River,  in  the  Territory  known  as  Upper 
Louisiana,  acquired  by  the  United  States  of  France,  and  situate 
north  of  the  latitude  of  thirty-six  degrees  thirty  minutes  north,  and 
north  of  the  State  of  Missouri.  Said  Dr.  Emerson  held  the  plain 
tiff  in  slavery  at  said  Fort  Snelling  from  said  last-mentioned  date 
until  the  year  1838. 

"  In  the  year  1835,  Harriet,  who  is  named  in  the  second  count  of 
the  plaintiff's  declaration,  was  the  negro  slave  of  Major  Taliaferro, 
who  belonged  to  the  army  of  the  United  States.  In  that  year,  1835, 
said  Major  Taliaferro  took  said  Harriet  to  said  Fort  Snelling,  a 
military  post,  situated  as  hereinbefore  stated,  and  kept  her  there  as 
a  slave  until  the  year  1836,  and  then  sold  and  delivered  her  as  a 
slave  at  said  Fort  Snelling  unto  the  said  Dr.  Emerson  hereinbefore 
named.  Said  Dr.  Emerson  held  said  Harriet  in  slavery  at  said 
Fort  Snelling  until  the  year  1838. 

"  In  the  year  1836,  the  plaintiff  and  said  Harriet,  at  said  Fort 
Snelling,  with  the  consent  of  said  Dr.  Emerson,  who  then  claimed 
to  be  their  master  and  owner,  intermarried,  and  took  each  other  for 
husband  and  wife.  Eliza  and  'Lizzie,  named  in  the  third  count  of 
the  plaintiff's  declaration,  are  the  fruits  of  that  marriage.  Eliza  is 
about  fourteen  years  old,  and  was  born  on  board  the  steamboat 
Gipsey,  north  of  the  north  line  of  the  State  of  Missouri,  and  upon 
the  river  Mississippi.  Lizzie  is  about  seven  years  old,  and  was 
born  in  the  State  of  Missouri,  and  at  the  military  post  called  Jeffer 
son  Barracks. 

"  In  the  year  1838,  said  Dr.  Emerson  removed  the  plaintiff  and 
said  Harriet  and  their  said  daughter  Eliza  from  said  Fort  Snelling 
to  the  State  of  Missouri,  where  they  have  ever  since  resided. 

"  Before  the  commencement  of  this  suit,  said  Dr.  Emerson  sold 
and  conveyed  the  plaintiff,  said  Harriet,  Eliza,  and  Lizzie,  to  the 
defendant  as  slaves,  and  the  defendant  has  ever  since  claimed  to 
hold  them  and  each  of  them  as  slaves. 

"  At  the  times  mentioned  in  the  plaintiff's  declaration,  the  de 
fendant,  claiming  to  be  the  owner  as  aforesaid,  laid  his  hands  upon 


Dred  Scott  Decision  105 

said  plaintiff,  Harriet,  Eliza,  and  Lizzie,  and  imprisoned  them,  doing 
in  this  respect,  however,  no  more  than  what  he  might  lawfully  do  if 
they  were  of  right  his  slaves  at  such  times." 

It  is  our  purpose  here  only  to  set  forth  what  was  decided, 
or  attempted  to  be  decided,  bearing  upon  slavery  and  its  polit 
ical  status  in  the  United  States. 

This  purpose  we  can  accomplish  no  better  than  by  quoting 
parts  of  the  Syllabi  of  the  case. 

We  quote: 

"  A  free  negro  of  the  African  race,  whose  ancestors  were  brought 
to  this  country  and  sold  as  slaves,  is  not  a  '  citizen  '  within  the 
meaning  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

"When  the  Constitution  was  adopted,  they  were  not  regarded  in 
any  of  the  States  as  members  of  the  community  which  constituted 
the  State,  and  were  not  numbered  among  its  '  people  or  citizens.' 
Consequently,  the  special  rights  and  immunities  guaranteed  to  citi 
zens  do  not  apply  to  them.  And  not  being  '  citizens  '  within  the 
meaning  of  the  Constitution,  they  are  not  entitled  to  sue  in  that 
character  in  a  court  of  the  United  States,  and  the  Circuit  Court 
has  not  jurisdiction  in  such  a  suit. 

"  The  only  two  clauses  in  the  Constitution  which  point  to  this 
race  treat  them  as  persons  whom  it  was  morally  lawful  to  deal  in  as 
articles  of  property  and  to  hold  as  slaves. 

"  The  change  in  public  opinion  and  feeling  in  relation  to  the 
African  race  which  has  taken  place  since  the  adoption  of  the  Con 
stitution  cannot  change  its  construction  and  meaning,  and  it  must 
be  construed  and  administered  now  according  to  its  true  meaning 
and  intention  when  it  was  formed  and  adopted. 

"  The  plaintiff,  having  admitted  (by  his  demurrer  to  the  plea  in 
abatement)  that  his  ancestors  were  imported  from  Africa  and  sold 
as  slaves,  he  is  not  a  citizen  of  the  State  of  Missouri  according  to 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  was  not  entitled  to  sue 
in  that  character  in  the  Circuit  Court. 

"  The  clause  in  the  Constitution  authorizing  Congress  to  make 
all  needful  rules  and  regulations  for  the  government  of  the  territory 
and  other  property  of  the  United  States  applies  only  to  territory 
within  the  chartered  limits  of  some  of  the  States  when  they  were 


io6  Political  History  of  Slavery 

colonies  of  Great  Britain,  and  which  was  surrendered  by  the  British 
Government  to  the  old  Confederation  of  the  States  in  the  treaty  of 
peace.  It  does  not  apply  to  territory  acquired  by  the  present  Fed 
eral  Government,  by  treaty  or  conquest,  from  a  foreign  nation. 

"  The  United  States,  under  the  present  Constitution,  cannot  ac 
quire  territory  to  be  held  as  a  colony,  to  be  governed  at  its  will  and 
pleasure.  But  it  may  acquire  and  may  govern  it  as  a  Territory 
until  it  has  a  population  which,  in  the  judgment  of  Congress,  entitled 
it  to  be  admitted  as  a  State  of  the  Union. 

"  During  the  time  it  remains  a  Territory  Congress  may  legislate 
over  it  within  the  scope  of  its  constitutional  powers  in  relation  to 
citizens  of  the  United  States — and  may  establish  a  territorial  gov 
ernment — and  the  form  of  this  local  government  must  be  regulated 
by  the  discretion  of  Congress — but  with  powers  not  exceeding  those 
which  Congress  itself,  by  the  Constitution,  is  authorized  to  exercise 
over  citizens  of  the  United  States,  in  respect  to  their  rights  of  per 
sons  or  rights  of  property. 

;'  The  Territory  thus  acquired  is  acquired  by  the  people  of  the 
United  States  for  their  common  and  equal  benefit,  through  their 
agent  and  trustee,  the  Federal  Government.  Congress  can  exercise 
no  power  over  the  rights  of  persons  or  property  of  a  citizen  in  the 
Territory  which  is  prohibited  by  the  Constitution.  The  govern 
ment  and  the  citizens,  whenever  the  Territory  is  open  to  settlement, 
both  enter  it  with  their  respective  rights  denned  and  limited  by  the 
Constitution. 

"  Congress  has  no  right  to  prohibit  the  citizens  of  any  particular 
State  or  States  from  taking  up  their  home  there,  while  it  permits 
citizens  of  other  States  to  do  so.  Nor  has  it  a  right  to  give  privi 
leges  to  one  class  of  citizens  which  it  refuses  to  another.  The  ter 
ritory  is  acquired  for  their  equal  and  common  benefit — and  if  open 
to  any  it  must  be  open  to  all  upon  equal  and  the  same  terms. 

"  Every  citizen  has  a  right  to  take  with  him  into  the  Territory 
any  article  of  property  which  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
recognizes  as  property. 

"  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  recognizes  slaves  as 
property,  and  pledges  the  Federal  Government  to  protect  it.  And 
Congress  cannot  exercise  any  more  authority  over  property  of  that 
description  than  it  may  constitutionally  exercise  over  property  of 
any  other  kind. 


Dred  Scott  Decision  107 

"The  act  of  Congress,  therefore,  prohibiting  a  citizen  of  the 
United  States  from  taking  with  him  his  slaves  when  he  removes  to 
the  Territory  in  question  to  reside,  is  an  exercise  of  authority  over 
private  property  which  is  not  warranted  by  the  Constitution — and 
the  removal  of  the  plaintiff,  by  his  owner,  to  that  Territory,  gave 
him  no  title  to  freedom. 

"  The  plaintiff  himself  acquired  no  title  to  freedom  by  being 
taken  by  his  owner  to  Rock  Island,  in  Illinois,  and  brought  back  to 
Missouri.  This  court  has  heretofore  decided  that  the  status  or 
condition  of  a  person  of  African  descent  depended  on  the  laws  of 
the  State  in  which  he  resided." 

Thus  the  highest  and  most  august  judicial  tribunal  of  this 
country  pronounced  doctrines  abhorrent  to  the  age,  over 
throwing  the  acts  and  practices  of  the  fathers  and  framers  of 
the  Republic,  and  pronouncing  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  in  so 
far  as  it  restricted  human  slavery,  and  all  like  enactments  as, 
from  the  beginning,  unconstitutional. 

This  decision  startled  the  bench  and  bar  and  the  thinking 
people  of  the  whole  country.,  not  alone  on  account  of  the 
doctrines  laid  down  by  the  court,  but  because  of  the  new  de 
parture  of  a  high  court  in  going  beyond  the  confines  of  the 
case  made  on  the  record  to  announce  them. 

It  is,  to  say  the  least,  only  usual  for  any  court  to  decide  the 
issues  necessary  to  a  determination  of  the  real  case  under  con 
sideration,  nothing  more;  but  the  court  in  this  case  first  de 
cided  that  the  Circuit  Court,  from  which  error  was  prosecuted, 
had  no  jurisdiction  to  render  any  judgment,  it  having  found 

upon  the  showing  of  Scott  himself  that  he  was  still  a  slave; 
not  even  to  render  a  judgment  against  him  and  in  favor  of 
defendants  for  costs." 

In  the  opinion  it  is  said : 

"It  is  the  judgment  of  this  court  that  it  appears  by  the  record 
before  us  that  the  plaintiff  in  error  is  not  a  citizen  of  Missouri,  in 
the  same  sense  in  which  that  word  is  used  in  the  Constitution  ;  and 
that  the  Circuit  Court  of  the  United  States,  for  that  reason,  had  no 
jurisdiction  in  the  case,  and  could  give  no  judgment  in  it.  Its 


io8  Political  History  of  Slavery 

judgment  for  the  defendant  must,  consequently,  be  reversed,  and 
a  mandate  issued,  directing  the  suit  to  be  dismissed  for  want  of 
jurisdiction." 

Having  thus  decided,  it  followed  that  anything  said  or 
attempted  to  be  decided  on  other  questions  was  extra-judicial 
— mere  obiter  dicta,  if  even  that. 

Nor  does  the  objection  to  the  matters  covered  by  the  decis 
ion  rest  alone  on  its  extra-judicial  character,  but  on  the  fact 
that  in  settling  a  mere  individual  controversy  it  passed  from 
private  rights  to  public  rights  of  the  people  in  their  national 
character,  wholly  pertaining  to  political  questions,  entirely 
beyond  the  province  of  the  court,  legally,  judicially,  or  poten 
tially.  It  had  no  legal  right  as  a  court  to  decide  or  comment 
upon  what  was  not  before  it;  it  had  no  judicial  power  to  make 
any  decree  to  enforce  public  or  political  rights,  nor  yet  to  en 
force,  by  any  instrumentalities  or  judicial  machinery, —  fines, 
jails,  etc., —  any  such  decrees. 

Moreover,  the  decision  invaded  the  express  powers  of  Con 
gress  granted  to  it  by  the  Constitution  "  respecting  the  Terri 
tory  or  other  property  belonging  to  the  United  States." 
This  grant  is  preceded  in  the  Constitution  by  the  language, 
'  The  Congress  shall  have  power  to,"  *  etc. 

The  court  entered  the  political  field,  though  clothed  only 
with  judicial  power,  one  of  the  three  distinct  powers  of  the 
government.  For  wise  purposes  executive,  legislative,  and 
judicial  departments  were  provided  by  the  Constitution,  each 
to  be  potential  within  its  sphere,  acting  always,  of  course, 
within  their  respective,  proper,  limited,  constitutionally  con 
ferred  authority. 

"  The  judicial  power  shall  extend  to  all  cases  in  law  and 
equity  arising  under  this  Constitution." 

This  highest  judicial  tribunal,  it  is  seen,  passed  from  a  case 
wherein  no  jurisdiction,  as  it  held,  rested  in  the  courts  to  enter 
any  form  of  judgment — not  even  for  costs,  to  decide  matters 
not  pertaining  in  any  sense  to  the  particular  case,  nor  even  to 

1  Con.,  Art.  IV.,  Sec.  3,  Par.  2.  2Con.,  Art.  III.,  Sec.  2. 


Dred  Scott  Decision  109 

judicial  public  rights  of  the  people  or  the  government,  but 
wholly  to  the  political,  legislative  powers  of  Congress,  not  in 
any  degree  involved  in  the  jurisdictional  question  arising  and 
decided.  If  it  be  said  that  courts  of  review  or  error  some 
times  decide  all  the  questions  made  on  the  record,  though 
some  of  them  may  not  be  necessary  to  a  complete  disposition 
of  the  case  before  it,  it  must  be  answered  that  this  is  most 
rare,  if  at  all,  where  the  case  is  disposed  of,  as  was  the  Dred 
Scott  case,  against  the  trial  court's  jurisdiction.  But,  mani 
festly,  the  many  political  questions  discussed  at  great  length 
in  the  opinions  and  formulated  as  syllabi  (quoted  above)  for 
the  case,  did  not  and  could  not  arise  of  record,  and  they  were 
not  covered  by  assignments  of  error,  and  hence,  whether  the 
sole  question  decided  or  to  be  decided  was  one  of  jurisdiction 
or  not,  these  questions  can  only  be  regarded  as  discussions — 
personal  opinions  of  the  justices — not  rising  to  the  dignity  of 
mere  volunteer  opinions  on  matters  of  law ;  of  no  binding 
force  even  as  legal  precedents,  because  outside  of  the  case  and 
record — not  even  properly  obiter  dicta. 

But  slavery  then  dominated  and  permeated  everything  and 
everybody.  Why  should  the  justices  of  the  Supreme  Court 
be  free  from  its  influence  ?  The  Ordinance  of  1787  was  re- 
enacted  by  the  First  Congress  under  the  Constitution,  and  its 
slavery-restriction  clause  was  enforced,  without  question,  by 
Washington,  Adams,  Jefferson,  Madison,  Monroe,  and  Jack 
son  and,  their  administrations.  The  Missouri  Compromise 
line  had  stood  unassailed  for  above  a  third  of  a  century.  In 
1848  Polk  and  his  Cabinet  approved  the  Oregon  Bill  prohibit 
ing  slavery;  also  Pierce  and  his  Administration  approved 
(1853)  tne  extension  of  the  same  prohibition  over  Washington 
Territory. 

Earlier,  in  1845,  the  Texas  Annexation  Act,  as  we  have 
seen,  re-enacted  the  36°  30'  line  of  restriction  for  slavery,  and 
in  1848  the  pro-slavery  party  in  Congress  voted  to  extend  this 
line  to  California.  Congress  again  and  again  exercised  the 
power  of  legislating  for  the  Territories;  eleven  times,  between 
1823  and  1838,  it  amended  the  laws  of  the  Legislature  of 


no  Political  History  of  Slavery 

Florida,  thus  asserting  the  absolute  right  to  legislate  for  the 
Territories.  The  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  for 
nearly  seventy  years  had  assumed  and  acted  on  the  principle 
of  the  right  of  Congress  to  legislate  for  them. 

Now  all  became  changed,  as  though  a  new  oracle  of  con 
struction  had  appeared,  higher  and  wiser  than  all  who  had 
gone  before — an  oracle  who  knew  more  of  the  Constitution 
than  its  makers.  This  new  oracle  did  not  divine  the  fates. 
The  announcement  of  the  principle  that  the  Constitution 
treats  negroes  "  as  persons  whom  it  is  morally  lawful  to  deal 
in  as  articles  of  property  and  to  hold  as  slaves,"  shocked  the 
consciences  of  just  men  throughout  the  earth. 

Referring  to  the  times  when  the  Declaration  of  Indepen 
dence  and  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States  were  adopted, 
and  speaking  of  the  African  race,  the  Chief-Justice,  in  his 
opinion,  said: 

"  They  had,  for  more  than  a  century  before,  been  regarded  as 
beings  of  an  inferior  order,  and  although  unfit  to  associate  with  the 
white  race,  either  in  social  or  political  relations  :  and  so  far  infer 
ior,  that  they  had  no  rights  which  the  white  man  was  bound  to  respect  : 
and  that  the  negro  might  justly  and  lawfully  be  reduced  to  slavery 
for  his  benefit." 

These  and  kindred  expressions  astonished  all  civilization  and 
all  Christian  people. 

The  North  was  stunned  by  the  decision,  some  fearing  that 
slavery  was  soon  to  become  national.  The  South  exulted 
boastfully  of  their  cause,1  loudly  proclaiming  the  paramount, 
binding  force  of  the  supreme  judicial  tribunal  in  the  Republic. 
Free  labor  and  free  laborers  were  decried.  They  were,  in 
speech  and  press,  called  "mud  sills  of  society :  "  only  negro 
slavery  ennobled  the  white  race. 

The  over-zealous  South  was  even  persuaded  that  the  small 
farmers,  trafficking  merchants,  and  mechanics  did  not  possess 
bravery  enough  to  fight  for  liberty. 

1  Robert  Toombs  of  Georgia  in  extravagant  exuberance  is  reported  to  have  said  : 
"  I  expect  to  call  the  roll  of  my  slaves  at  the  foot  of  Bunker  Hill." 


John  Brown  Raid  in 

Justice  Catron,  especially,  claimed  that  Napoleon  I.,  by  the 
insertion  of  the  third  article  of  the  treaty  of  cession  of  the 
Louisiana  Province,  had  forever  fastened  slavery  on  it.  But 
of  this  we  have  already  spoken.1 

It  was  slavery's  last  triumph.  Dred  Scott,  his  wife,  and 
two  little  girls  were  remanded  to  slavery,  to  be  freed  by  the 
irresistible  might  of  divine  justice,  worked  out  through  the 
expiating  blood  of  the  long-offending  white  race,  commingled 
on  many  fields  with  the  blood  of  their  own  race. 


JOHN    BROWN    RAID 1859 

John  Brown,  of  Kansas  fame,  eccentric,  misguided,  and 
intense  in  his  hatred  of  slavery,  and  of  martyr  stuff,  encouraged 
by  some  of  the  most  influential  anti-slavery  men  of  the  North, 
who  were  goaded  on  by  slavery's  perennial  aggressions,  with 
a  "pike-pole"  at  Harper's  Ferry  (October  16,  1859)  pricked 
the  fetid  pit  of  slavery,  causing  a  tremor  to  run  through  the 
whole  body  of  it.  He  had  with  him  an  army  of  eighteen,  five 
of  whom  were  free  negroes.2  They  had  rifles  and  pistols  for 
themselves,  and  a  few  pikes  for  the  slaves  they  hoped  to  free. 

Brown  had  assembled  his  band  at  the  Kennedy  farm  in 
Maryland,  a  few  miles  distant  from  Harper's  Ferry,  Virginia. 

He  professed  to  believe  he  might  succeed  if  he  could  take 
the  latter  place,  as  it  "would  serve  as  a  notice  to  the  slaves 
that  their  friends  had  come,  and  as  a  trumpet  to  rally  them  to 
his  standard."  This  he  stated  to  Frederick  Douglas,  whom 
he  urged  in  vain  to  join  his  expedition.3  His  object  was  to 
free  slaves,  not  to  take  life. 

This  daring  body  seized  the  United  States  armory,  arsenal, 
and  the  rifle-works,  all  government  property.  By  midnight 
Brown  was  in  full  possession  of  Harper's  Ferry.  Before  morn 
ing  he  caused  the  arrest  of  two  prominent  slave  owners,  one 

1  Ante,  p.  43-5. 

-  I  fist,  of  the  U.  S.  (Rhodes),  vol.  ii.,  p.  393. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  392. 


ii2  Political  History  of  Slavery 

of  whom  was  Colonel  Lewis  Washington,  the  great  grandson 
of  a  brother  of  George  Washington,  capturing  of  him  the  sword 
of  Frederick  the  Great,  and  a  brace  of  pistols  of  Lafayette, 
presents  from  them,  respectively,  to  General  Washington.  It 
was  Brown's  special  ambition  to  free  the  Washington  slaves. 
Fighting  began  at  daybreak  of  the  i/th.  The  Mayor  of 
Harper's  Ferry  and  another  fell  mortally  wounded. 

Brown  and  his  party  by  noon  were  driven  into  an  engine- 
house  near  the  armory,  where  they  barred  the  doors  and  win 
dows,  and  made  port-holes  for  their  rifles.  There  they  were 
besieged  and  fired  on  by  their  assailants. 

Colonel  Washington  and  others  of  their  captives  were  held 
by  Brown  in  the  engine-house.  Shots  were  returned  by  Brown 
and  his  men.  Some  idea  of  Brown's  character  and  bravery 
can  be  formed  from  Colonel  Washington's  description  of  his 
conduct  in  the  engine-house  fort : 

"  Brown  was  the  coolest  and  firmest  man  I  ever  saw  in  defying 
danger  and  death.  With  one  son  dead  by  his  side,  and  another 
shot  through,  he  felt  the  pulse  of  his  dying  son  with  one  hand  and 
held  his  rifle  with  the  other,  and  commanded  his  men  with  the  ut 
most  composure,  encouraging  them  to  be  firm  and  sell  their  lives  as 
dearly  as  they  could." 

He  wreaked  no  vengeance  on  his  prisoners.  Though  his 
sons  and  friends  were  dead  and  dying  around  him,  and  him 
self,  near  the  end  of  the  fight,  cleaved  down  with  a  sword,  and 
bayonets  were  thrust  in  his  body,  he  sheltered  his  prisoners  so 
not  one  of  them  was  harmed.  And  non-combatants  were  not 
fired  on  by  his  band. 

When  Brown's  party  in  t\iQfort  were  reduced  to  himself  and 
six  men,  two  or  more  of  these  being  wounded,  Colonel  Robert 
E.  Lee,  then  of  the  United  States  Army,  arrived  with  a  company 
of  marines.  After  Lee's  demand  to  surrender  was  refused  by 
Brown,  an  entrance  was  forced,  and,  bleeding,  some  dying,  he 
and  those  left  were  taken.  Of  the  nineteen,  ten  were  killed, 
five  taken  prisoners,  and  four  had  succeeded  in  escaping,  two 
of  the  four  being  afterwards  captured  in  Pennsylvania.  They 


John  Brown  Raid  113 

had  killed  five  and  wounded  nine  of  the  inhabitants  and  of 
their  besiegers. 

Not  only  was  all  the  vicinity  wildly  excited,  but  the  whole 
South  was  in  an  uproar.  Slavery  had  been  physically  assaulted 
in  its  home.  The  North  partook  of  the  excitement,  generally 
condemning  the  rash  proceeding,  though  many  deeply  sympa 
thized  with  the  purpose  of  Brown's  movement,  and  his  heroic 
conduct  and  life  caused  many  to  admire  him.  He  was  a  de 
vout  believer  in  the  literal  reading  of  the  Holy  Bible,  and  of 
the  special  judgments  of  God,  as  he  interpreted  them  in  the 
Old  Testament.  His  attack  on  slavery  he  regarded  as  more 
rational  than  and  as  likely  to  triumph  as  Joshua's  attack  on  a 
walled  city  with  trumpets  and  shouts,  and  as  Gideon's  band 
of  three  hundred,  armed  only  with  trumpets,  lamps,  and  pitch 
ers  in  its  encounter  with  a  great  army.  As  Jericho's  walls 
had  fallen,  and  Gideon's  band  had  put  to  flight  Midianites  and 
Amalekites  in  countless  multitudes  like  grasshoppers,  so,  Brown 
expected,  at  least  fondly  hoped  and  devoutly  prayed,  to  see 
the  myriads  of  human  slaves  go  free  in  America.  He  did  not, 
however,  expect  a  general  rising  of  the  slaves. 

He  did  not  seek  to  San  Domingoize  the  South,  and  against 
this  he  provided  penalties  in  his  prepared  provisional  constitu 
tion.1 

Brown  had  been  encouraged  and  materially  aided  by  Gerritt 
Smith,  Dr.  Howe  of  Boston,  Stearns,  Sanborn,  Frederick 
Douglas,  Higginson,  Emerson,  Parker,  Phillips,  and  others 
of  less  renown;  some,  if  not  all,  of  whom  had  neither  under 
stood  nor  approved  of  his  plan  of  attack. 

The  slaves  did  not  rise,  nor  did  they  in  any  considerable 
number  even  know  at  the  time  the  real  purpose  of  their  would- 
be  liberator. 

During  the  excitement  of  the  first  news  Greeley  prophetic 
ally  wrote : 

"We  deeply  regret  this  outbreak  ;  but  remembering  if  their  fault 
was  grievious,  grieviously  have  they  answered  for  it,  we  will  not  by 

1  Mason's  Report,  p.  57. 

VOL.  I.— 8. 


ii4  Political  History  of  Slavery 

one  reproachful  word  disturb  the  bloody  shrouds  wherein  John 
Brown  and  his  compatriots  are  sleeping.  They  dared  and  died  for 
what  they  felt  to  be  right,  though  in  a  manner  which  seems  to  us  to 
be  fatally  wrong.  Let  their  epitaphs  remain  unwritten  until  the  not 
distant  day  when  no  slave  shall  clank  his  chains  in  the  shades  of 
Monticello  or  by  the  graves  of  Mount  Vernon."  J 

Brown's  raid  did  not  seriously,  as  was  then  expected,  affect 
the  November  elections  of  that  year,  and  they  were  favorable 
to  the  young,  aggressive  Republican  party,  formed  to  stay  the 
extension  of  slavery. 

It  is  not  the  purpose  here  to  write  detailed  history  of  partic 
ular  events,  only  to  name  such  as  had  a  substantial  effect  on 
slavery;  yet  John  Brown's  fate  should  be  recorded.  He  was 
captured  October  i8th;  indicted  on  October  2Oth;  arraigned 
and  put  on  his  trial  at  Charlestown,  in  Jefferson  County,  Vir 
ginia,  though  his  open  wounds  were  still  bleeding;  and  on 
October  31,  1859,  a  Jury  brought  in  a  verdict  finding  him 
"  Guilty  of  treason,  and  conspiring  and  advising  with  slaves 
and  others  to  rebel;  and  murder  in  the  first  degree."  Save  in 
the  matter  of  precipitation,  his  trial  was  fair,  under  all  the 
circumstances,  and  no  other  result  could  have  been  expected. 
November  2  he  was  sentenced  to  be  hung  on  December  2, 
1859. 

When  arraigned  for  sentence,  among  other  things  he  said : 

"  If  it  is  deemed  necessary  I  should  forfeit  my  life  in  furtherance 
of  the  end  of  justice,  and  mingle  my  blood  further  with  the  blood  of 
my  children,  and  with  the  blood  of  millions  in  this  slave  country 
whose  rights  are  disregarded  by  wicked,  cruel,  and  unjust  exact- 
ments,  I  say,  let  it  be  done." 

A  little  later  he  wrote : 

"  I  can  leave  to  God  the  time  and  manner  of  my  death,  for  I  be 
lieve  now  that  the  sealing  of  my  testimony  before  God  and  man 
with  my  blood  will  do  far  more  to  further  the  cause  to  which  I  have 
earnestly  devoted  myself  than  anything  else  I  have  done  in  my  life. 

1  Hist,  of  U.  S.  (Rhodes),  vol.  ii.,  p.  403  ;  New  York  Tribune,  Oct.  igth. 


Presidential  Elections,  1856-1860          115 

.  .  .  .  I  am  quite  cheerful  concerning  my  approaching  end, 
since  I  am  convinced  I  am  worth  infinitely  more  on  the  gallows 
than  I  could  be  anywhere  else." 

On  his  way  from  the  prison  to  the  scaffold  he  handed  to  a 
guard  a  paper  on  which  were  written  his  last  words. 

"  I,  John  Brown,  am  now  quite  certain  that  the  crimes  of  this 
guilty  land  will  never  be  purged  away  but  with  blood.  I  had,  as  I 
now  think  vainly,  flattered  myself  that  without  very  much  bloodshed 
it  might  be  done." 

Emerson,  Parker,  and  the  Abolition  press  of  the  North 
eulogized  Brown  and  his  followers. 

His  raid  was  made  another  pretence  for  uniting  the  South. 

The  American  Anti-Slavery  Society  in  its  calendar  of  events 
designated  1859  as  "  The  John  Brown  Year." 

John  Brown  was  immortalized  in  a  song  written  and  sung 
first  in  1861,  and  thereafter  by  the  Union  army  wherever  it 
marched.  On  the  spot  where  he  was  hanged  a  Massachusetts 
regiment  (1862)  sung: 

"  John  Brown's  body  lies  mouldering  in  the  grave, 
But  his  soul  goes  marching  on,"  etc. 

The  significance  of  John  Brown's  attack,  small  as  it  was  in 
point  of  numbers  engaged  in  it,  lies  in  the  fact  that  it  is  the 
only  one  of  its  character  openly  made  on  slavery  in  the  history 
of  the  United  States,  and  in  the  further  fact  that  it  was  at  the 
threshold  of  Secession — War,  ending  in  universal  emancipation. 

XXI 

PRESIDENTIAL    ELECTIONS,    1856-1860 

The  political  campaign  of  1856  has  thus  far  been  passed  by, 
as  it  more  appropriately  belongs  to  a  history  of  the  political 
movements  leading  up  to  secession. 

Between  the  two  great  parties — Republican  and  Democratic 
— the  most  important  issue  was  the  slavery  question. 


n6  Political  History  of  Slavery 

The  Republican  party,  born  of  the  slavery  agitation,  in  its 
platform  (1856)  denied 

"  The  authority  of  Congress,  of  a  territorial  legislature,  of  any  in 
dividual  or  association  of  individuals,  to  give  legal  existence  to 
slavery  in  any  Territory  of  the  United  States. 

"  Declared  that  the  Constitution  confers  on  Congress  sovereign 
power  over  the  Territories  of  the  United  States  for  their  govern 
ment,  and  that  in  the  exercise  of  this  power  it  is  both  the  right  and 
the  duty  of  Congress  to  prohibit  in  the  Territories  those  twin  relics 
of  barbarism — Polygamy  and  Slavery." 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Democratic  party  in  1856,  fresh  from 
the  contest  in  Congress  over  the  Nebraska  Bill  and  the  repeal 
of  the  Missouri  Compromise,  denied  the  right  of  Congress  to 
exclude  slavery  from  the  Territories,  and  declared  it 

"The  right  of  the  people  of  all  the  Territories,  including  Kansas 
and  Nebraska  ...  to  form  a  Constitution,  with  or  without 
domestic  slavery,  and  be  admitted  into  the  Union." 

There  were  other  but  minor  issues  discussed  in  1856.  John 
C.  Fremont  was  nominated  by  the  Republicans  and  James 
Buchanan  by  the  Democrats.  Douglas  failed  of  the  Presi 
dential  prize  through  violent  antagonism  from  the  South, 
especially  from  Jefferson  Davis,  Wm.  L.  Yancey,  Robert 
Toombs,  and  other  leading  pro-slavery  statesmen.  They 
distrusted  him,  though  he  had  led  them  to  victory  in  1854  in 
repealing  the  36°  30'  restriction  of  slavery,  and  in  throwing 
open,  as  we  have  seen,  the  Nebraska  territorial  empire  to  the 
influx  of  slaves.  He  was  patriotic,  and  hence  could  not  be 
depended  on  to  take  the  next  step  towards  forcing  slavery  into 
the  Territories  and  to  favor  a  dissolution  of  the  Union. 

Buchanan,  a  pliant  tool,  was  elected  by  a  plurality  vote  over 
Fremont  and  Fillmore,  the  candidate  of  the  America  party. 
Fremont  carried,  with  good  majorities,  all  the  free  States 
save  Indiana,  New  Jersey,  Pennsylvania,  Illinois,  and  Cali 
fornia. 

The  popular  discussion  of  the  slavery  question  in  the  cam- 


Presidential  Elections,  1856-1860         n; 

paign  was  thorough,  memorable,  exciting,  educating,  and, 
though  resulting  in  defeat  to  the  anti-slavery  party,  it  marked 
the  trend  of  public  sentiment,  and  clearly  foreshadowed  that 
it  would  soon  triumph. 

The  Lincoln-Douglas  debates  of  1858  still  further  elucidated 
to  the  masses  of  the  people  the  issues  impending,  and  indicated 
that  the  end  of  slavery  extension  was  near. 

The  Dred  Scott  decision,  announced  March,  1857,  had  com 
pletely  overthrown,  so  far  as  it  could  be  done  by  judicial- 
political  obiter  dicta,  Douglas's  Popular  Sovereignty  theory, 
leaving  him  with  only  the  northern  end  (and  that  not  united) 
of  his  party  endeavoring  to  uphold  it. 

Next  came  the  Presidential  campaign  of  1860,  the  last  in 
which  a  slave  party  participated. 

The  Democratic  party  met  in  delegate  convention  in  April, 
1860,  in  Charleston,  South  Carolina,  and  after  seven  days  of 
struggle,  during  which  disunion  threats  were  made  by  Yancey 
and  others,  the  delegates  from  the  Cotton  States — South 
Carolina,  Alabama,  Mississippi,  Louisiana,  Florida,  Texas,  and 
Arkansas — seceded,  for  the  alleged  reason  that  a  majority  of 
the  convention  adopted  the  1856  Democratic  platform  which 
upheld  the  Douglas-Popular  Sovereignty  doctrine  as  applied 
to  the  Territories. 

The  seceding  delegates  had  voted  for  a  platform  declaring 
the  right  of  all  citizens  to  settle  in  the  Territories  with  all  their 
property  (including  slaves)  "without  its  being  destroyed  or  im 
paired  by  Congressional  or  territorial  legislation,"  and  further, 
That  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Federal  Government  in  all  its 
departments  to  protect,  when  necessary,  the  rights  of  persons 
and  property  in  the  Territories,  and  wherever  else  its  constitu 
tional  authority  extends." 

This  was  not  only  the  new  doctrine  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
but  to  it  was  superadded  the  further  claim  that  the  Constitu 
tion  required  Congress  and  all  the  departments  of  the  govern 
ment  to  protect  the  slaveholder  with  his  slaves,  when  once  in 
a  Territory,  against  territorial  legislation  or  other  unfriendly 
acts.  By  this  most  startling  doctrine  the  Constitution  was  to 


n8  Political  History  of  Slavery 

become  an  instrument  to  establish  and  protect  slavery  in  all  the 
territorial  possessions  of  the  Republic. 

Douglas  failed  of  nomination  at  Charleston  for  want  of  a 
two  thirds  vote  of  the  entire  convention  as  originally  organized. 
The  convention  adjourned  to  meet,  June  nth,  at  Baltimore, 
and  the  seceding  branch  of  it  also  adjourned  to  meet  at  the 
same  time  at  Richmond,  but  later  it  decided  to  meet  with  and 
again  become  a  part  of  the  convention  at  Baltimore.  At  this 
time  the  South  had  control  of  the  Senate,  and  May  25,  1860, 
before  the  convention  reassembled,  and  after  a  most  acrimon 
ious  debate  into  which  Douglas  was  drawn  and  in  which  Jef 
ferson  Davis  bitterly  assailed  him,  the  resolutions  of  the  latter 
were  passed,  affirming  the  "property"  theory,  with  the  new  doc 
trine  of  constitutional  protection  of  it  in  the  Territories  added. 

The  convention  reassembled,  and  at  the  end  of  five  days' 
wrangle  and  recrimination,  during  which  the  members  called 
each  other  "  disorganizes,"  '  bolters,"  '  traitors,"  "  dis- 
unionists,"  "  abolitionists,"  accompanied  by  violent  threats, 
it  disrupted  again,  its  chairman,  Caleb  Cushing,  of  Massachu 
setts,  led  the  bolters  and  was  followed  by  the  delegates  gener 
ally  from  the  Southern  States.  They  organized  at  once  a 
separate  convention. 

Douglas  was  nominated  by  the  originally  organized  conven 
tion,  and  John  C.  Breckinridge  by  the  bolters,  each  on  the 
sharply  defined  platform  relating  to  slavery,  mentioned  above. 

Still  another  political  body  assembled  in  Baltimore  in  1860, 
to  wit :  ' '  The  Constitutional  Union  Convention. "  It  met  May 
9th.  Its  platform  was  intended  to  be  comprehensive  and  so 
simple  and  patriotic  that  everybody  might  endorse  it.  It  de 
clared  against  recognizing  any  principle  other  than 

'  The  Constitution  of  the  Country,  the  Union  of  the  States, 
and  the  Enforcement  of  the  Laws. ' ' 

John  Bell  of  Tennessee  was  nominated  on  this  broad  plat 
form  for  President,  with  Edward  Everett  of  Massachusetts  for 
Vice-President,  both  eminently  respectable  statesmen,  but  the 
times  were  not  auspicious  for  mere  generalized  principles  or 
mere  respectability. 


Presidential  Elections,  1856-1860          119 

The  great  Wigwam-Republican  Convention  met  at  Chicago, 
May  16,  1860,  with  delegates  from  all  the  free  States,  the 
Territories  of  Kansas  and  Nebraska,  and  from  Delaware, 
Maryland,  Virginia,  Kentucky,  and  Missouri. 

Its  platform  was  long,  and  affirmed  the  principles  of  the 
Declaration  of  Independence,  pronounced  against  interfering 
with  slavery  in  the  States,  denounced  the  John  Brown  raid  as 
"  among  the  gravest  of  crimes,"  and,  in  the  main,  was  temper 
ate  and  conservative. 

On  the  question  of  slavery  in  the  Territories  it  was  radical : 

"  That  the  new  dogma  that  the  Constitution,  of  its  own  force, 
carries  slavery  into  any  or  all  of  the  Territories  of  the  United  States, 
is  a  dangerous  political  heresy,  at  variance  with  the  explicit  pro 
visions  of  that  instrument  itself,"  etc. 

"  That  the  normal  condition  of  all  the  territory  of  the  United 
States  is  that  of  freedom,  .  .  .  and  we  deny  the  authority  of 
Congress,  of  a  Territorial  Legislature,  or  of  any  individuals,  to  give 
legal  existence  to  slavery  in  any  Territory  in  the  United  States." 

Lincoln  of  Illinois,  Seward  of  New  York,  Chase  of  Ohio, 
and  Cameron  of  Pennsylvania  were  the  principal  candidates  for 
nomination,  but  the  contest  turned  out  to  be  between  Lincoln 
and  Seward,  each  of  whom  was  regarded  eminently  qualified 
for  the  Presidency  and  an  especial  representative  of  his  party 
on  the  slavery  issue. 

Lincoln  was  nominated  on  the  third  ballot,  and  Hannibal 
Hamlin,  a  sturdy  New  England  statesman,  was  nominated  for 
Vice-President. 

Slavery,  with  its  tri-cornered  issues,  was  the  sole  absorbing 
question  discussed  in  the  campaign.  In  the  South,  the  Breck- 
inridge  wing  assailed  the  Douglas  party,  which  combated  it 
there  in  turn.  In  the  North,  the  Republican  party  attacked 
furiously  both  the  Douglas  and  Breckinridge  wings  of  the 
Democratic  party;  they,  in  turn,  fighting  back  and  fighting 
each  other. 

The  Bell  and  Everett  party,  though  it  claimed  to  be  the  only 
party  of  the  Constitution,  fell  into  ridicule,  as  it  really  advo- 


120  Political  History  of  Slavery 

cated  no  well-defined  principles  on  any  subject  whatever.  Bell 
and  Everett,  however,  carried  Tennessee,  Kentucky,  and  Vir 
ginia.  Lincoln  carried  all  the  Northern  States,  save  three  of 
the  electoral  votes  in  New  Jersey. 

Of  the  303  electoral  votes,  Lincoln  had  180,  Douglas  12 
(Missouri  9  and  New  Jersey  3),  Breckinridge  72,  and  Bell  39, 
thus  giving  Lincoln  57  over  all.  He  was  the  first  and  only 
President  elected  on  a  direct  slavery  issue. 

The  slavery  question,  thus  sharply  presented,  was  decided 
at  the  polls  by  the  people,  and  their  verdict  was  for  freedom 
in  the  Territories.  No  more  slave  States;  no  more  dilution 
of  slavery  by  spreading  it  (as  was  once  advocated  by  Clay  and 
others)  for  its  amelioration. 

It  must  live  or  die  in  States  wherein  it  was  established. 
Neither  successful  secession,  state-rights,  nor  accomplished 
disunion  could  extend  it.  Like  all  wrong,  it  could  not  stand 
still;  to  flourish,  it  must  be  aggressive  and  progressive.  To 
limit  it  was  to  strangle  it.  This  its  votaries  well  understood. 

In  the  history  of  the  world  there  never  were  more  brilliant, 
more  devoted,  more  earnest,  more  infatuated,  and  yet  more 
inconsistent  propagandists  of  the  institution  of  human  slavery 
than  in  our  Republic  during  the  period  of  the  agitation  on 
nullification — state-rights — secession — disunion  lines.  They 
were  of  the  Calhoun  school.  They  declaimed  in  halls  of 
legislation  and  on  the  stump  and  rostrum  for  "  Liberty,"  and 
hugged  closely  human  slavery,  often  professing  to  believe  it  of 
divine  right. 

XXII 

DISSOLUTION    OF    THE    UNION 

Secession  was  at  hand !  At  first  it  was  justified  under  the 
banner  of  state-rights,  on  the  theory  that  the  Union  was  a 
voluntary  compact  of  States  which  could  be  broken  at  the 
will  of  one  or  all.  That  a  Republic  was  only  an  experiment, 
to  exist  until  overthrown  by  any  member  of  it.  That  the 
blood  ot  the  Revolution  was  shed,  not  for  the  establishment 


ABRAHAM    LINCOLN. 


Dissolution  of  the  Union  121 

of  an  independent  nation,  but  for  a  confederacy  of  separate 
States.  In  the  guise  of  nullification  it  appeared,  as  we  have 
seen,  in  1832  :  excessive  tariff  duties  were  the  pretext.  In  1835 
it  assumed  to  be  the  champion  of  slavery,  because  on  the 
slavery  question  only  could  the  South  be  united.  It  is  due 
to  history  to  say,  of  the  decade  preceding  1860,  patriotism 
was  not  universal  even  in  the  free  States.  Slavery  had  her 
votaries  there.  Interests  of  trade  affected  many.  Prejudice 
against  the  blacks  and  ties  of  kinship  affected  others.  Parties 
and  affiliations  and  love  of  political  power  controlled  the  policy 
of  influential  men  in  all  sections  of  the  country. 

The  South  was  aggressive,  and  smarted  under  its  defeats  in 
attempts  to  extend  its  beloved  institution.  The  prayer  of 
Calhoun  for  a  united  South  was  fast  being  realized,  and  a 
fatal  destiny  goaded  on  its  leaders.  Slavery,  indeed,  no  longer 
stood  on  a  firm  foundation.  Public  sentiment  had  sapped  it. 
It  could  not  live  and  tolerate  free  speech,  and  a  free  press,  or 
universal  education  even  of  the  white  race  where  it  existed. 
All  strangers  sojourning  in  the  South  were  under  espionage; 
they,  though  innocent  of  any  designs  on  slavery,  were  often 
brutally  treated  and  driven  away.  It  \vas  only  the  distin 
guished  visitors  who  were  entertained  with  the  much  boasted- 
of  Southern  hospitality.  The  German  or  other  industrious 
foreign  emigrant  rarely,  if  ever,  ventured  into  the  South. 

Its  towns  and  cities  languished.  Slavery  was  bucolic  and 
patriarchal.  It  could  not,  in  its  most  prosperous  state,  flourish 
on  small  plantations;  nor  could  the  many  own  slaves  or  be  in 
terested  in  their  labor.  Not  exceeding  two  tenths  of  the  white 
race  South  owned,  at  any  time,  or  were  interested  in  slave 
labor  or  slaves.  The  eight  tenths  had  no  political  or  social 
standing.  They  were,  in  a  large  sense,  in  another  form,  white 
slaves. 

The  Border  States  held  their  negroes  by  a  precarious  tenure. 
The  most  intelligent  were  constantly  escaping.  The  inter- 
traffic  in  slaves  bred  in  the  more  northern  slave  States  was 
likely  to  become  less  profitable.  And  patrols  by  night,  to 
insure  order,  had  become  generally  necessary. 


122  Political  History  of  Slavery 

The  publication  of  Harriet  Beecher  Stowe's  Uncle  Tom  s 
Cabin  had  a  great  effect  upon  public  sentiment  North,  and 
some  influence  even  in  the  South.  The  Impending  Crisis  of 
the  South  :  Hoiv  to  Meet  //,  written  by  Hilton  R.  Helper,  a 
poor  white  man  of  North  Carolina  (1857),  an  arraignment  of 
slavery  from  the  standpoint  of  the  white  majority  South,  was 
denounced  as  incendiary  in  Congress.  Sherman  of  Ohio, 
having  in  some  way  endorsed  its  publication,  when  a  candidate 
for  Speaker,  was  denounced  by  Millson  of  Virginia,  who  de 
clared  that  "  one  who  consciously,  deliberately,  and  of  purpose 
lent  his  name  and  influence  to  the  propagation  of  such  writings 
is  not  only  not  fit  to  be  Speaker,  but  is  not  fit  to  live." 

Sherman's  endorsement  of  the  Helper  book  caused  his  de 
feat  for  Speaker,  and  a  riot  occurred  in  the  House  during  the 
contest :  not  quite  bloodshed.  Of  the  scene,  Morris  of  Illinois 
said : 

"  A  few  more  such  scenes  .  .  .  and  we  shall  hear  the  crack 
of  the  revolver  and  see  the  gleam  of  the  brandished  blade." 

The  contents  of  the  book,  though  temperate  in  tone,  were 
said  by  Pryor  of  Virginia  to  deal  only  "  in  rebellion,  treason, 
and  insurrection." 

Scenes,  most  extraordinary,  were  not  unfrequently  enacted 
in  the  House  of  Representatives,  all  having  the  effect  to  in 
flame  the  public  mind.  Some  of  these  were  brought  on  by 
violent  speeches  of  Northern  statesmen,  made  in  response  to 
the  defiant  attitude  or  utterances  of  Southern  men,  boastful  of 
their  bravery. 

One  such  scene  was  precipitated  in  1860  by  Owen  Lovejoy 
of  Illinois,  who,  in  a  speech  to  the  House,  denounced 

"  Slaveholding  as  worse  than  robbing,  than  piracy,  than  poly 
gamy.  The  enslavement  of  human  beings  because  they  are  inferior 
...  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Democrats,  and  the  doctrine  of  devils  as 
well !  and  there  is  no  place  in  the  universe  outside  the  five-points 
of  hell  and  the  Democratic  party  where  the  practice  and  prevalence 
of  such  doctrines  would  not  be  a  disgrace." 


Dissolution  of  the  Union  123 

Lovejoy   had    more   than  an  ordinary  excuse  for  using  such 
violent  language. 

As  long  before  as  November  7,  1837,  his  brother,  Elijah  P. 
Lovejoy,  had  been  murdered  at  Alton,  Illinois,  while  defending 
his  printing-press  from  a  mob,  chiefly  from  Missouri,  his  offence 
being  that  he  published  an  Abolition  paper  (The  Observer]. 
His  press  had  thrice  before  in  a  year  been  destroyed. 

Pryor  of  Virginia,  Barksdale  of  Mississippi,  and  others  re 
sented  Lovejoy 's  expletives,  calling  him  "  an  infamous,  per 
jured  villain,"  "  a  perjured  negro-thief,"  and  demanding  of 
the  Speaker  to  "  order  that  blackhearted  scoundrel  and  negro- 
stealing  thief  to  take  his  seat." 

Personal  conflicts  were  imminent  between  opposing  mem 
bers.  Potter  of  Iowa,  Kellogg  of  Illinois,  and  others  promptly 
and  fiercely  came  to  Lovejoy's  defence.  The  latter  finished 
his  speech  amid  excitement  and  threats.  Pryor  afterwards 
demanded  of  Potter  "  the  satisfaction  usual  among  gentle 
men,"  who  promptly  proposed  to  give  it  to  him,  naming 
bowie-knives  as  the  weapons  for  the  duel.  This  mode  of 
gaining  "  satisfaction  "  was  not  accepted,  because  it  was 
"  vulgar,  barbarous,  and  inhuman."  Potter  thenceforth  be 
came  a  hero,  and  less  was  heard  of  Northern  cowardice. 

This,  and  like  incidents,  kindled  the  fast-spreading  flame, — 
real  battle-fires  were  then  almost  in  sight. 

It  must  not  be  assumed  the  Republican  party,  before  the 
war,  favored  the  abolition  of  slavery.  Its  principal  leaders 
denied  they  were  abolitionists;  on  the  contrary,  they  insisted 
that  their  party  would  not  interfere  with  slavery  where  it 
existed  by  State  law. 

The  sentiment  of  the  people  in  that  party,  however,  was,  on  f- 
this  question,  in  advance  even  of  its  progressive  leaders.     Thei 
enforcement  of  the  Fugitive-Slave  Law  caused  many  and  most! 
important  accessions  to  the  Abolitionists.     Wendell  Phillips! 
became  an  Abolitionist  on  seeing  Garrison  dragged  by  a  mob\ 
through  the  streets  of  Boston  ;  Josiah  Quincy  by  the  martyrdom  \ 
of  Lovejoy;  other  men  of  much  note,  and  multitudes  of  the 
moving,  controlling  masses,  were  decided  to  oppose  human 


124  Political  History  of  Slavery 

.slavery  by  kindred  scenes  all  over  the  North.  They  took 
solemn,  often  secret  vows,  on  witnessing  men  and  women 
earned  off  in  chains  to  slavery,  to  wage  eternal  war  on  the  in 
stitution  ;  this,  in  imitation  ef  the  vow  of  Hannibal  of  old  to 
his  father,  Hamilcar,  to  wage  eternal  war  on  Rome. 

At  last,  through  causes  for  the  existence  of  which  the  South 
was  chiefly  to  blame,  the  sentiment  North  was  culminating  so 
strongly  against  slavery  that  soon,  had  secession  and  war  not 
come,  slavery  would  have  everywhere  been  assailed.  It  is  as 
impossible  to  stay  the  march  of  a  great  moral  movement,  when 
backed  by  enlightened  masses,  as  to  stem  the  rushing  waters 
of  a  great  stream  in  flood  time.  Hence,  the  experiment  of 
dissolution  of  the  Union  to  save  slavery  was  due,  if  ever,  to  be 
tried  in  1861 ! 

Secession  was  made  easier  by  reason  of  a  long  cherished 
habit  of  the  Southern  people  to  speak  of  themselves  boastfully 
as  citizens  of  their  respective  States,  thus,  "  I  am  a  Virgin 
ian  ";  "  I  am  a  Kentuckian,"  seemingly  oblivious  to  the  fact 
that  they  were  citizens  of  the  United  States.  This  habit  de 
stroyed  in  some  degree  national  patriotism,  and  promoted  a 
State  pride,  baleful  in  its  consequences.  In  many  of  the  slave 
States  voting  was  done  vive  voce ;  that  is,  by  the  voter  an 
nouncing  at  the  polls  to  the  judges  the  name  of  the  person 
for  whom  he  voted  for  each  office.  This,  it  was  contended, 
promoted  frankness,  manliness,  independence,  and  honesty  in 
elections.  On  the  other  hand,  it  was  claimed,  with  much 
truth,  that  it  was  a  most  refined  and  certain  method  of  coercing 
the  dependent  poorer  classes  into  voting  as  the  dominant  class 
might  desire,  and  hence  almost  totally  destructive  of  inde 
pendence  in  voting. 

An  anecdote  is  told  of  John  Randolph  of  Roanoke,  who, 
when  at  the  Court  of  St.  James  (England)  was  conspicuous  for 
his  boasting  that  he  was  a  Virginian.  He  was  introduced  by 
an  English  official  for  an  after-dinner  speech  with  a  request 
that  he  should  tell  the  distinguishing  difference  between  a 
Virginian  and  a  citizen  of  the  American  Republic.  He  curtly 
responded : 


Secession  of  the  States  125 

"  The  difference  is  in  the  system  of  voting  on  election  days  ;  in 
Virginia  a  voter  must  stand  up,  look  the  candidates  in  the  eye,  and 
bravely  and  honestly  name  his  preference,  like  a  man  ;  while  gener 
ally  a  voter  in  other  States  of  the  Union  is  permitted  to  sneak  to 
the  polls  like  a  thief,  and  slip  a  folded  paper  into  a  hole  in  a  box, 
then  in  a  cowardly  way  steal  home  ;  the  one  promotes  manliness, 
the  other  cowardice." 

XXIII 

SECESSION    OF    STATES l86o-I 

From  what  has  been  said,  it  will  be  seen  the  hour  had  arrived 
for  practical  secession — disunion — or  a  total  abandonment  by 
the  South  of  its  defiant  position  on  slavery.  The  latter  was 
not  to  be  expected  of  the  proud  race  of  Southern  statesmen 
and  slaveholders.  They  had  pushed  their  cause  too  far  to  re 
cede,  and  the  North,  though  conceding  generally  that  there 
was  no  constitutional  power  to  interfere  with  slavery  where  it 
existed,  was  equally  determined  not  to  permit  its  extension. 
In  secession  lay  the  only  hope  of  either  forcing  the  North  to 
recede  from  its  position,  or,  if  successful,  to  create  a  new  gov 
ernment  wherein  slavery  should  be  universal  and  fundamental. 
Never  before  had  it  been  proposed  to  establish  a  nation  solely 
to  perpetuate  human  slavery. 

The  election  of  Lincoln  was  already  announced  as  a  sufficient 
cause  for  secession.  The  South  had  failed  to  make  California 
slave;  to  make  four  more  slave  States  out  of  Texas;  to  secure 
pledges  that  out  of  the  New  Mexico  Territory  other  slave 
States  should  be  formed ;  and  to  make  Kansas  a  slave  State. 
It  had  also  failed  to  acquire  Cuba,  already  slave,  for  division 
into  more  slave  States.  There  was,  moreover,  a  certainty  that 
many  more  free  States  would  be  admitted  from  the  territorial 
domain  of  the  great  West.  The  political  equilibrium  in  Con 
gress  on  the  line  of  slavery  had  therefore  become  impossible 
for  all  the  future.  These  were  the  grievances  over  which  the 
South  brooded. 

But  was  it  not  in  the  divine  plan  that  slavery  in  the  Republic 


126  Political  History  of  Slavery 

should  come  to  a  violent  end  ?  Nowhere  among  the  king 
doms  or  empires  of  the  earth  had  it  become,  or  had  it  ever 
been  so  deeply  implanted,  as  a  part  of  a  political  system.  In 
the  proud,  boastful,  free  Republic  of  America,  in  the  afternoon 
of  the  nineteenth  century,  where  the  Christian  religion  was 
taught,  where  liberty  of  conscience  was  guaranteed  by  organic 
law,  where  civilization  was  assumed  to  exist  in  its  most  enlight 
ened  and  progressive  stage,  there,  alone,  the  slave  owner 
marshalled  boastfully  his  human  slaves,  selling  them  on  the 
auction  block  or  otherwise  at  will,  to  be  carried  to  distant  parts, 
separating  wife  and  husband,  parents  and  children,  and  in  a 
thousand  ways  shocking  all  the  purer  instincts  of  humanity. 

Nor  did  its  evil  effects  begin  or  cease  with  the  black  slave. 

Jefferson,  speaking  of  slavery  in  the  United  States  when  it 
existed  in  a  more  modified  form,  described  its  immoral  effect 
on  the  master  and  his  family  thus : 

"  The  whole  commerce  between  master  and  slave  is  perpetual 
exercise  of  the  most  boisterous  passions,  the  most  unremitting  des 
potism  on  the  one  part  and  degrading  submission  on  the  other. 
Our  children  see  this,  and  learn  to  imitate  it.  ...  The  parent 
storms,  the  child  looks  on,  catches  the  lineaments  of  wrath,  puts  on 
the  same  airs  in  the  circle  of  small  slaves,  gives  a  loose  to  the  worst 
of  passions,  and  thus  nursed,  educated,  and  daily  exercised  in 
tyranny,  cannot  but  be  stamped  by  it  with  odious  peculiarities."  1 

The  virtue  of  the  white  race  was  necessarily  involved  in  the 
institution.  The  blood  of  the  dominant  race  became  inter 
mingled  with  the  black,  and  often  white  blood  predominated 
in  the  slave.  The  offspring  of  slaveholders  became  slaves,  and 
were  dealt  in  the  same  as  the  pure  African.  Concubinage 
existed  generally  where  slaves  were  numerous. 

The  rule  was  that  any  person  born  of  a  slave  mother  was 
doomed  to  perpetual  slavery. 

As  early  as  1856,  perhaps  earlier,  conferences  were  pro 
posed  among  leaders  in  some  of  the  Southern  States  looking 
to  secession.  They  were  repeated  again  in  1858,  and  before 

1  Jefferson's  Works,  viii.,  p.  403. — Notes  on  Virginia. 


Secession  of  the  States  127 

the  election  of  Lincoln  in  1860.'    And  Southern  secret  societies 
were  formed  in  1860  to  promote  the  same  end. 

The  existence  of  a  disunion  cabal  in  Buchanan's  Cabinet, 
working  to  bring  about  disunion,  was  hardly  a  secret. 

Howell  Cobb  of  Georgia,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  John 
B.  Floyd  of  Virginia,  Secretary  of  War,  Jacob  Thompson  of 
Mississippi,  Secretary  of  the  Interior,  and  possibly  others, 
were  of  the  Cabinet  cabal. 

Buchanan,  though  himself  desiring  to  preserve  the  Union, 
had  not  the  bold  temperament,  and  he  had  too  long  been  a 
political  tool  of  the  slave  power  to  effectually  resist  its  violent 
aggressions;  nor  did  he  have  the  discernment  to  discover  that 
his  official  household  was  the  centre  of  a  disunion  movement. 
His  Secretary  of  War  distributed  officers  of  the  army  believed 
to  be  friendly  to  the  South  where  they  could  become  available 
to  it ;  he  sent  from  the  North  small  arms  and  cannon,  ammuni 
tion  and  stores  where  they  could  be  seized  at  the  right  time.8 
Members  of  the  Cabinet  kept  the  secession  leaders  advised  of 
all  acts  of  the  administration,  and  generally  aided  them.  The 
auspicious  time,  if  ever,  seemed  to  have  come  for  a  successful 
dissolution  of  the  Union.  The  army  and  navy  were  full  of  able 
Southern  men,  ready,  as  the  sequel  proves,  to  go  with  their 
States,  abandon  the  country  that  had  nurtured  and  educated 
them,  and  the  flag  that  had  been  their  glory. 

(jovernor  Wm.  H.  Gist,  of  South  Carolina,  October  5,  1860, 
by  confidential  letters  to  the  governors  of  the  cotton  States, 
fairly  inaugurated  disunion,  based  on  the  anticipated  election 
of  Abraham  Lincoln  a  month  thence.3 

One  week  later,  without  waiting  for  a  consultation  of  gov 
ernors  of  slave  States,  he,  by  proclamation,  convened  the 
Legislature  of  South  Carolina  to  "  take  action  for  the  safety  and 
protection  of  the  State. ' ' 

This  body  met  November  5th,  the  day  preceding  the  Presi 
dential  election. 

1  Lincoln  (Nicolay  and  Hay),  vol.  ii.,  pp.  299—314. 

^Annual  Cyclopedia  (Appleton),  1861,  p.  123. 

3  For  this  letter,  see  Lincoln  (N.  and  H.),  vol.  ii.,  p.  306. 


128  Political  History  of  Slavery 

The  alleged  grounds  of  justification  for  this  early  meeting 
were : 

"  The  strong  probability  of  the  election  to  the  Presidency  of  a 
sectional  candidate  by  a  party  committed  to  the  support  of  meas 
ures  which,  if  carried  out,  will  inevitably  destroy  our  equality  in  the 
Union"  etc. 

This  was  the  avowed  reason,  finally,  for  secession,  though 
the  true  reason  was  the  absolute  restriction  of  slavery  and  the 
overthrow  of  the  slave  power  in  the  Republic.  The  election 
of  a  Republican  President  was,  of  course,  a  disappointment  to 
Southern  statesmen,  long  used  to  absolute  sway  in  Congress 
and  in  the  administration  of  the  government.  The  charge 
that  Lincoln  was  a  sectional  President  was  true  only  to  the  ex 
tent  that  freedom  was  sectional.  Slavery  only  was  then,  by 
secessionists,  regarded  as  national. 

The  first  important  step  of  the  South  Carolina  Legislature 
was  to  appropriate  $100,000  to  be  expended  by  the  Governor 
in  purchasing  small-arms  and  a  battery  of  rifled  cannon.  With 
out  opposition,  a  convention  was  called  to  take  "  into  consider 
ation  the  dangers  incident  to  the  position  of  the  State  in  the 
Federal  Union."  Her  two  United  States  Senators  and  other 
of  her  Federal  officers  forthwith  resigned.  A  grand  mass 
meeting  was  held,  November  I7th,  at  Charleston,  generally 
participated  in  by  the  ladies,  merchants,  etc.  The  Stars  and 
Stripes  were  not  displayed,  but  a  white  palmetto  flag,  after 
solemn  prayer,  was  unfurled  in  its  stead.  Disunion  was  here 
inaugurated.  November  I3th  the  Legislature  of  South  Caro 
lina  stayed  the  collection  of  all  debts  due  to  citizens  of  non- 
slaveholding  States.  It  was  not  sufficient  to  repudiate  the 
Union,  but  honest  debts  must  also  be  repudiated. 

The  convention  thus  called  first  met  at  Columbia,  December 
1 7th,  thence  adjourned  to  Charleston,  where  (appropriately) 
on  December  20,  1860,  an  Ordinance  of  Secession  was  passed 
reading  thus : 


Secession  of  the  States  129 

"An  Ordinance, 

"  To  dissolve  the  Union  between  the  State  of  South  Carolina  and 
other  States  united  with  her  under  the  compact  entitled  '  The  Constitu 
tion  of  the  United  States  of  America' 

"  We,  the  people  of  the  State  of  South  Carolina,  in  convention 
assembled,  do  declare  and  ordain,  and  it  is  hereby  declared  and 
ordained  :  That  the  Ordinance  adopted  by  us  in  convention  on  the 
23d  day  of  May,  in  the  year  of  our  Lord  1788,  whereby  the  Con 
stitution  of  the  United  States  of  America  was  ratified,  and  also,  all 
acts  and  parts  of  acts  of  the  General  Assembly  of  this  State,  ratify 
ing  amendments  of  the  said  Constitution,  are  hereby  repealed,  and 
the  Union  now  subsisting  between  South  Carolina  and  other  States^ 
under  the  name  of  '  The  United  States  of  America/  is  hereby 
dissolved.'  ' 

This  action  was  taken  in  Buchanan's  administration  while 
secessionists  and  promoters  of  disunion  were  yet  in  his  Cabi 
net,  and  Jefferson  Davis  and  others  were  still  plotting  in 
Congress. 

Great  stress  was  laid  upon  the  right  to  rescind  the  original 
Ordinance  of  1788  ratifying  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States,  and  the  Union  of  the  States  was  denominated  only  a 
"compact"  The  passage  of  the  Ordinance  of  Secession  was 
followed  by  "  bonfires  and  illuminations,  ringing  of  bells, 
insults  to  the  Stars  and  Stripes,"  participated  in  by  South 
Carolina  aristocracy,  especially  cheered  on  by  the  first  ladies 
of  the  State  and  city,  little  dreaming  that  slavery's  opening 
death-knell  was  being  proclaimed.1 

It  was  fitting  that  South  Carolina  should  lead  the  van  of 

1  The  prophecy:  "The  rebellion,  which  began  where  Charleston  is,  shall  end 
where  Charleston  was,"  was  fulfilled. 

For  a  vivid,  though  sad  description  of  Charleston  at  the  end  of  the  war,  by  an 
eye-witness,  see  Civil  War  in  Am.  (Draper),  vol.  i.,  p.  564.  Andrew's  Hall, 
where  the  first  Ordinance  passed,  and  the  Institute  in  which  it  was  signed,  were 
then  charred  rubbish. 

The  Demon  war  had  been  abroad  in  Charleston — who  respects  not  life  or 
death. 

VOL.  I.— 9. 


i3°  Political  History  of  Slavery 

secession.  She  had,  in  a  Colonial  state,  furnished  more  Tories 
in  the  Revolution  of  1776  than  any  of  the  other  colonies;  she 
had  initiated  secession  through  nullification  in  1832;  and  her 
greatest  statesman,  Calhoun,  was  the  first  to  propose  disunion 
as  a  remedy  for  slavery  restrictions. 

Events  succeeded  rapidly. 

An  Alabama  convention  met  and,  on  January  8,  1861,  re 
ceived  commissioners  from  South  Carolina,  and  on  the  nth 
passed,  in  secret  session,  an  Ordinance  of  Secession,  refusing 
to  submit  it  to  a  vote  of  her  people. 

Mississippi,  on  January  9,  1861,  passed,  through  a  conven 
tion,  a  like  Ordinance. 

Georgia,  January  iQth,  by  a  convention  passed  her  Ordinance 
of  Secession. 

Louisiana's  convention  passed  an  Ordinance  of  Secession 
January  25,  1861. 

Texas  passed,  in  convention,  on  February  i,  1861,  a  like 
Ordinance,  which  was  ratified  by  a  vote  of  her  people  February 
24th.1 

1  Sam  Houston  was  the  rightful  Governor  of  Texas  in  1861,  but  on  the  adoption 
of  an  Ordinance  of  Secession  (February  24,  1861)  he  declined  to  take  an  oath  of 
allegiance  to  the  new  government  and  was  deposed  by  a  convention  March  16, 
1 86 1.  Just  previous  to  the  vote  of  the  State  on  ratifying  the  ordinance,  at  Gal- 
veston,  before  an  immense,  seething,  secession  audience,  with  few  personal  friends 
to  support  him,  in  the  face  of  threatened  violence,  he  denounced  the  impolicy  of 
Secession,  and  painted  a  prophetic  picture  of  the  consequences  that  would  result 
to  his  State  from  it.  He  said  : 

"  Let  me  tell  you  what  is  coming  on  the  heels  of  secession.  The  time  will  come 
when  your  fathers  and  husbands,  your  sons  and  brothers,  will  be  herded  together 
like  sheep  and  cattle,  at  the  point  of  the  bayonet,  and  your  mothers  and  wives, 
your  sisters  and  daughters,  will  ask  :  Where  are  they  ?  You  may,  after  the  sacrifice 
of  countless  millions  of  treasure  and  hundreds  of  thousands  of  precious  lives,  suc 
ceed,  if  God  is  not  against  you,  in  winning  Southern  independence.  But  I  doubt 
it.  It  is  a  bare  possibility  at  best.  I  tell  you  that  while  I  believe,  with  you,  in  the 
doctrine  of  state  rights,  the  North  is  determined  to  preserve  this  Union.  They 
are  not  a  fiery,  impulsive  people,  as  you  are,  for  they  live  in  cooler  climates.  But 
when  they  begin  to  move  in  a  given  direction,  where  great  interests  are  involved, 
they  move  with  the  steady  momentum  of  a  mighty  avalanche,  and  what  I  fear  is 
they  will  overwhelm  the  South  with  ignoble  defeat." 

During  this  speech  a  horse  in  a  team  near  by  grew  restive,  and  kicked  out  of 
harness,  but  was  soon  beaten  to  submission  by  his  driver.  Houston  seized  on  the 


Secession  of  the  States  131 

Thus  seven  States  resolved  to  secede  before  Abraham  Lin 
coln  became  President. 

And  each  of  these  States  had  prepared  for  armed  opposi 
tion ;  most,  if  not  all,  of  their  Senators  and  Representatives  in 
Congress  had  withdrawn  ;  in  most  of  the  States  named  United 
States  forts,  arms,  military  stores,  and  other  public  property 
had  been  seized ;  and  many  officers  of  the  army  and  navy  had 
deserted,  weakly  excusing  their  action  by  declaring  they  must 
go  with  their  States. 

Events  were  happening  in  Washington.  Cass  resigned  as 
Secretary  of  State  because  Buchanan  adhered  to  the  doctrine 
that  there  was  no  power  to  coerce  a  seceding  State.  Under 
this  baleful  doctrine,  secession  had  secured,  apparently,  a  free 
and  bloodless  right  of  way  in  its  mad  rush  to  dissolve  the 
Union  and  to  establish  a  slave  empire.  It  was  at  first  thought 
by  Southern  leaders  wise  to  postpone  the  formation  of  a 
"  Confederacy"  until  Lincoln  was  inaugurated.  But  about 
January  1st  there  came  a  Cabinet  rupture.  Floyd  was  driven 
from  it,  and  Joseph  Holt  of  Kentucky,  a  most  able  and 
patriotic  Union  man,  succeeded  him.  Later,  Edwin  M.  Stan- 
ton  and  Jeremiah  Black  came  into  the  Cabinet,  Buchanan 
yielding  to  more  patriotic  influences  and  adopting  more  de 
cided  Union  measures,  though  not  based  wholly  on  a  coercive 
policy. 

incident  for  an  illustration,  saying  :  "  That  horse  tried  a  little  practical  secession 
— See  how  speedily  he  was  whipped  back  into  the  Union."  This  quick-witted 
remark  brought  him  applause  from  unsympathetic  hearers. 

Houston  refused  to  recognize  any  Secession  authority,  and  a  few  days  subse 
quent  to  his  deposition  retired  to  his  home  near  Huntsville,  without  friends,  full 
of  years,  weak  in  body,  suffering  from  wounds  received  in  his  country's  service, 
but  strong  in  soul,  and  wholly  undismayed,  though  mourning  his  State's  folly. 
In  front  of  his  house  on  the  prairie  he  mounted  a  four-pound  cannon,  saying  : 
"  Texas  may  go  to  the  devil  and  ruin  if  she  pleases,  but  she  shall  not  drag  me 
along  with  her."  History  does  not  record  another  such  incident.  To  the  credit 
of  the  Secessionists,  they  respected  the  age  and  valor  of  the  old  hero,  and  did  not 
molest,  but  permitted  him  to  hold  his  personal  "fortress"  until  his  death,  which 
occurred  July  26,  1863  (three  weeks  after  Vicksburg  fell),  in  his  seventy-first  year. 

He  died  satisfied  the  Confederacy  and  secession  would  soon  be  overthrown  and 
the  Union  preserved. 


i32  Political  History  of  Slavery 

But,  on  January  5,  1861,  a  "  Central  Cabal,"  consisting  of 
"  Southern  Statesmen,"  who  still  lingered  at  Washington, 
where  they  could  best  promote  and  direct  the  secession  of  the 
States  and  keep  the  administration  in  check,  if  not  control  it, 
met  in  one  of  the  rooms  of  the  Capitol  to  devise  an  ultimate 
programme  for  the  future.  It  agreed  on  these  propositions: 

First.     Immediate  secession  of  States. 

Second.  A  convention  to  meet  at  Montgomery,  Alabama, 
not  later  than  February  I5th,  to  organize  a  Confederacy. 

To  prevent  hostile  legislation  under  the  changed  and  more 
loyal  impulses  of  the  President  and  his  reconstructed  Cabinet, 
the  cotton  States  Senators  should  remain  awhile  in  their 
places,  to  "  keep  the  hands  of  Buchanan  tied." 

This  cabal  appointed  Senators  Jefferson  Davis,  Slidell,  and 
Mallory  "  to  carry  out  the  objects  of  the  meeting." 

Thus,  beneath  the  "  Dome  of  the  Capitol,"  treason  was 
plotted  by  Senators  and  Representatives  who  still  held  their 
seats  and  official  places,  and  still  received  their  pay  from  the 
United  States  Treasury,  for  the  sole  purpose  of  enabling  them 
the  better  to  accomplish  the  end  sought.  Think  of  the  pro 
spective  President  of  the  "  Confederate  States  of  America," 
their  future  Minister  to  the  Court  of  France,  and  their  future 
Secretary  of  the  Navy,  plotting  secretly  in  the  Capitol  at 
Washington  to  destroy  the  Union  !  But  these  were  treasonable 
times. 

Through  resolutions  of  the  Mississippi  Legislature,  the  Mont 
gomery  Convention  was  hastened,  and  it  met  February  4,  in 
stead  of  February  15,  1861,  as  suggested  by  the  Washington 
caucus  of  Southern  Congressmen.  The  delegates  from  the  six 
seceded  States  east  of  the  Mississippi  assembled,  and  a  little 
later  (March  2d)  delegates  from  Texas  joined  them.  On  the 
fourth  day  of  its  session  the  national  slave-child  was  born,  and 
christened  "  Confederate  States  of  America."  The  next  day 
Jefferson  Davis  was  elected  President,  and  Alexander  H. 
Stephens  of  Georgia,  Vice-President.  Stephens  took  the  oath 
of  office  on  the  day  following  his  election.  Davis  arrived  from 

1  Lincoln  (N.  and  H.),  vol.  iii.,  pp.  180-1. 


Secession  of  the  States  133 

Washington,  and  was,  on  the  i8th,  inaugurated  the  first  (and 
last)  President  of  this  Confederacy. 

The  next  step  was  a  permanent  Constitution.  With  char 
acteristic  celerity,  this  was  prepared  and  adopted  March  n, 
1861,  one  week  after  Lincoln  became  President  of  the  United 
States,  though  the  Confederacy  had  been  formed  almost  a 
month  before  his  official  term  commenced. 

This  instrument  was  modelled  on  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States. 

It  forbade  the  importation  of  negroes  of  the  African  race 
from  any  foreign  country,  other  than  the  slaveholding  States 
or  Territories  of  the  United  States.  Then  following,  for  the 
first  time  probably  in  the  history  of  nations,  the  proposed  new 
Republic  dedicated  itself  to  eternal  slavery,  thus : 

"  No  bill  of  attainder,  ex  post  facto  law,  or  law  denying  or  impair 
ing  the  right  of  property  in  negro  slaves,  shall  be  passed."  1 

Singularly  enough,  the  astute  friends  of  the  institution  of 
slavery,  knowing  and  avowing  that  it  could  not  survive  com 
petition  with  the  free,  well-paid  labor  necessary  to  manufactur 
ing  industries,  and  knowing  also  that  slavery  was  only  adapted 
to  rural  pursuits,  not  to  skilled  mechanical  labor,  and  desiring 
to  plant  human  slavery  permanently  in  the  new  nation,  re 
moved  from  all  possibility  of  competition  with  anything  that 
might,  by  dignifying  labor,  build  up  wealth  as  witnessed  in  the 
great  Northern  cities  and  thus  endanger  slavery,  sought  to 
protect  it  by  a  clause  incorporated  in  their  organic  act,  pro 
hibiting  any  form  of  tariff 'to  protect  home  industries. 

"  Nor  shall  any  duties  or  taxes  on  importations  from  foreign  na 
tions  be  laid  to  promote  or  foster  any  branch  of  industry."  a 

Cotton  was  ever  to  be  "  King  "  in  the  Confederacy. 
Mississippi's  "  Declaration  of  the  Immediate  Causes  "  justi 
fying  secession  with  perfect  honesty  announced : 

JCon.,  Art.  I.,  Sec.  9,  pars.  I,  4. 

2  Confederate  Con.,  Art.  I.,  Sec.   S,  par.  I. 


i34  Political  History  of  Slavery 

"  Our  position  is  thoroughly  identified  with  the  institution  of 
slavery — the  greatest  material  interest  in  the  world.  ...  A  blow 
at  slavery  is  a  blow  at  commerce  and  civilization.  That  blow  has 
been  long  aimed  at  the  institution,  and  was  at  the  point  of  reaching 
its  consummation.  There  was  no  choice  left  us  but  submission  to 
the  mandates  of  abolition  or  a  dissolution  of  the  Union." 

The  best,  most  candid,  conservative,  and  comprehensive 
statement  in  explanation  and  vindication  of  the  Confederate 
Constitution,  the  purposes  and  objects  of  the  nation  and 
people  to  be  governed  by  and  under  it,  is  found  in  a  speech 
of  Vice-President  Stephens  at  Savannah,  Georgia,  delivered 
ten  days  (March  21,  1861)  after  its  adoption. 

Here  is  a  single  extract: 

"  The  new  Constitution  has  put  at  rest  forever  all  the  agitating 
questions  relating  to  our  peculiar  institution — African  slavery  as  it 
exists  among  us — the  proper  status  of  the  negro  in  our  form  of 
civilization.  This  was  the  immediate  cause  of  the  late  rupture  and 
present  revolution.  Jefferson,  in  his  forecast,  had  anticipated  this  as 
the  rock  upon  which  the  old  Union  would  split.  He  was  right.  What 
was  conjecture  with  him  is  now  a  realized  fact.  But  whether  he 
fully  comprehended  the  great  truth  upon  which  that  rock  stood  and 
stands,  may  be  doubted.  The  prevailing  ideas  entertained  by  him, 
and  most  of  the  leading  statesmen  at  the  time  of  the  formation  of 
the  old  Constitution,  were  that  the  enslavement  of  the  African  was 
in  violation  of  the  laws  of  nature  ;  that  it  was  wrong  in  principle, 
socially,  morally,  and  politically.  It  was  an  evil  they  knew  not  well 
how  to  deal  with,  but  the  general  opinion  of  the  men  of  that  day 
was  that,  somehow  or  other,  in  the  order  of  Providence,  the  institu 
tion  would  be  evanescent  and  pass  away.  This  idea,  though  not 
incorporated  in  the  Constitution,  was  the  prevailing  idea  at  the 
time.  The  Constitution,  it  is  true,  secured  every  essential  guaran 
tee  to  the  institution  while  it  should  last,  and  hence  no  argument 
can  be  justly  used  against  the  constitutional  guarantees  thus  se 
cured,  because  of  the  common  sentiment  of  the  day.  Those  ideas, 
however,  were  fundamentally  wrong.  They  rested  upon  the  as 
sumption  of  the  equality  of  races.  This  was  an  error.  It  was  a 
sandy  foundation,  and  the  idea  of  a  government  built  upon  it: 
when  the  *  storms  came  and  the  wind  blew,  it  fell.' 


Secession  of  the  States  135 

"  Our  new  government  is  founded  upon  exactly  the  opposite  idea; 
its  foundations  are  laid,  its  corner  stone  rests  upon  the  great  truth  that 
the  negro  is  not  equal  to  the  ivhite  man.  That  slavery — subordination 
to  the  superior  race,  is  his  natural  and  normal  condition.  This,  our 
new  government,  is  the  first  in  the  history  of  the  world  based  upon 
this  great  physical  and  moral  truth.  This  truth  has  been  slow  in 
process  of  its  development,  like  all  other  truths  in  the  various  de 
partments  of  science.  It  has  been  so  even  amongst  us.  Many  who 
hear  me,  perhaps,  can  recollect  well  that  this  truth  was  not  gener 
ally  admitted,  even  within  their  day.  The  errors  of  the  past  genera 
tion  still  clung  to  many  as  late  as  twenty  years  ago.  Those  at  the 
North  who  still  cling  to  these  errors,  with  a  zeal  above  knowledge, 
we  justly  denominate  fanatics." 

This  is  a  fair  and  truthful  exposition  of  the  fundamental 
principles  of  the  Confederacy,  fallacious  as  they  were. 

North  Carolina,  after  her  people  had  voted  down  a  conven 
tion  to  consider  the  question  of  secession  at  an  extra  session 
of  her  Legislature,  called  a  convention  which,  on  May  21, 
1861,  when  war  had  begun,  passed  an  Ordinance  of  Secession 
without  submission  to  a  vote  of  her  people. 

Virginia  through  her  Legislature  called  a  convention  which, 
April  17,  1861,  passed  an  Ordinance  of  Secession  in  secret 
session,  subject  to  ratification  by  a  vote  of  her  people.  This 
was  after  Sumter  had  been  fired  on. 

The  vote  was  taken  June  25th,  and  the  Ordinance  was 
ratified. 

Arkansas  defeated  in  convention  an  Ordinance  for  secession 
March  18,  but  passed  one  May  6,  1861,  without  a  vote  of  her 
people. 

Tennessee,  by  a  vote  of  her  people,  February  8,  1861  (67,- 
360  to  54,156),  voted  against  a  convention,  but  her  Legislature 
(May  7,  1861)  in  secret  session  adopted  a  "  Declaration  of  In 
dependence  and  Ordinance  dissolving  her  Federal  relations," 
subject  to  a  vote  of  her  people  on  June  8th.  The  vote  being 
for  separation,  her  Governor,  June  24,  1861,  declared  the  State 
out  of  the  Union.1 

1  McPherson's  Hist,  of  the  Rebellion,  pp.  4-8. 


136  Political  History  of  Slavery 

This  was  the  last  State  of  the  eleven  to  secede.  All  these 
four  ratified  the  Confederate  Constitution  and  joined  the 
already-formed  Confederacy. 

The  seceded  States  early  passed  laws  authorizing  the  organi 
zation  of  their  militia,  and  making  appropriations  for  defence 
against  coercion,  and  providing  for  the  seizure  of  United 
States  forts,  arsenals,  and  other  property  within  their  respec 
tive  limits,  and  later,  that  they  should  be  turned  over  to  the 
Confederate  States. 

Some  of  the  States  by  law  provided  severe  penalties  against 
any  of  their  citizens  holding  office  under  the  Government  of 
the  United  States.  Virginia,  in  July,  1861,  in  convention, 
passed  an  ordinance  declaring  that  any  citizen  of  Virginia 
holding  office  under  the  old  Government  should  be  forever 
banished  from  the  State,  and  if  he  undertook  to  represent  the 
State  in  the  Congress  of  the  United  States  he  should,  in  addi 
tion,  be  guilty  of  treason  and  his  property  confiscated. 

The  other  Border  States  failed  to  break  up  their  relations  to 
the  Union,  though  in  all  of  them  (Delaware,  Maryland,  Ken 
tucky,  and  Missouri)  various  irregular  expedients  were  resorted 
to,  to  declare  them  a  part  of  the  Confederacy.  From  their 
people,  however,  much  material  and  moral  support  was  given 
to  the  Confederate  cause. 

XXIV 

ACTION    OF    RELIGIOUS    DENOMINATIONS,    ETC. l86o-I 

Significant  above  all  other  of  the  great  events  resulting  from 
the  secession  of  the  Southern  States  was  the  dissolution  of  the 
great  religious  denominations  in  the  United  States.1 

First,  the  Old  School  Presbyterian  Church  Synod  of  South 
Carolina,  early  as  December  3,  1860,  declared  for  a  slave  Con 
federacy.  This  was  followed  by  other  such  synods  in  the 
South,  all  deciding  for  separation  from  the  Church  North. 
The  Baptists  in  Alabama,  Georgia,  and  South  Carolina  were 
equally  prompt  in  taking  similar  action. 

1  Hist,  of  Rebellion  (McPherson),  508-520. 


Action  of  Religious  Denominations        137 

Likewise  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  in  a  General 
Convention,  held  in  Columbia,  South  Carolina,  after  having 
endorsed  the  Confederacy,  adopted  a  "  Constitution  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the  Confederate  States  of 
America  "  ;  all  its  Southern  bishops  being  present  and  approv 
ing,  save  Bishop  Leonidas  Polk  of  Louisiana,  who  was  absent, 
a  Major-General  in  the  Confederate  army.1 

The  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  South  endorsed  disunion 
and  slavery;  it  had,  however,  in  1845,  separated  from  the 
Methodist  Church  North. 

The  Roman  Catholic  Church,  through  Bishop  Lynch,  early 
in  1861,  espoused  the  Confederate  cause,  and  he,  later,  corre 
sponded  with  the  Pope  of  Rome  in  its  interests,  receiving  a 
conciliatory  answer  in  the  Pope's  name  by  Cardinal  Antonelli. 

The  Young  Men's  Christian  Association  of  New  Orleans, 
May  22,  1861,  issued  an  Address  to  the  Young  Men  s  CJiristian 
Associations  of  North  America,  declaring  secession  justifiable, 
and  protesting,  "  in  the  name  of  Christ  and  his  divine  teach 
ings,"  against  waging  war  against  the  Southern  States  and 
their  institutions. 

Later,  in  1863,  the  "  Confederate  clergy"  issued  a  most 
memorable  "Address  to  Christians  throughout  the  World"  like 
wise  protesting  against  further  prosecution  of  the  war;  declar 
ing  the  Union  was  forever  dissolved,  and  specially  pointing 
out  "  the  most  indefensible  act  growing  out  of  the  inexcusable 
war  "  to  be 

"  The  recent  proclamation  of  the  President  of  the  United  States 
seeking  the  emancipation  of  the  slaves  of  the  South." 

And  saying  further: 

"  It  is  in  our  judgment  a  suitable  occasion  for  solemn  protest  on 
the  part  of  the  people  of  God  throughout  the  world." 

Thus  encouraged  and  upheld,  the  new  Confederacy,  with 
slavery  for  its  "  corner-stone,"  defiantly  embarked. 

1  He  was,  as  Lieutenant-General,  June  14,  1864,  killed  by  a  shell,  at  Marietta, 
Ga.,  while  reconnoitering  the  Union  lines. 


138  Political  History  of  Slavery 

The  counter-action  of  the  Church  North  was  equally  em 
phatic  for  freedom,  and  the  Union  of  the  States  under  one 
flag  and  one  God.1 

It  is  appropriate  in  connection  with  the  attitude  of  the  re 
ligious  people  of  the  country  towards  slavery  and  the  Confed 
eracy,  and  the  war  to  preserve  the  one  and  to  establish  the 
other,  to  quote  from  President  Lincoln's  valedictory  Inaugural 
Address  (March  4,  1865),  in  which  he  refers  to  the  attitude  of 
opposing  parties,  the  cause  of  the  conflict,  and  to  each  party 
invoking  God's  aid. 

"  Neither  party  expected  for  the  war  the  magnitude  or  the  dura 
tion  which  it  has  already  attained.  Neither  anticipated  that  the 
cause  of  the  conflict  might  cease  with,  or  even  before,  the  conflict 
itself  should  cease.  Each  looked  for  an  easier  triumph,  and  a 
result  less  fundamental  and  astounding.  Both  read  the  same  Bible 
and  pray  to  the  same  God,  and  each  invoked  His  aid  against  the 
other.  It  may  seem  strange  that  any  men  should  dare  to  ask  a  just 
God's  assistance  in  wringing  their  bread  from  the  sweat  of  other 
men's  faces  ;  but  let  us  'judge  not  that  we  be  not  judged/  The 
prayers  of  both  could  not  be  answered  ;  that  of  neither  has  been 
answered  fully. 

"  The  Almighty  has  His  own  purposes.  '  Woe  unto  the  world 
because  of  offences.  For  it  must  needs  be  that  offences  come  ;  but 
woe  to  that  man  by  whom  the  offence  cometh.'  If  we  shall  suppose 
that  American  slavery  is  one  of  those  offences  which,  in  the  provi 
dence  of  God,  must  needs  come,  but  which,  having  continued 
through  His  appointed  time,  He  now  wills  to  remove,  and  that  He 
gives  to  both  North  and  South  this  terrible  war,  as  the  woe  to  those 
by  whom  the  offence  came,  shall  we  discern  therein  any  departure 
from  those  divine  attributes  which  the  believers  in  a  living  God 
always  ascribe  to  Him  ?  Fondly  do  we  hope — fervently  do  we 
pray  that  this  mighty  scourge  of  woe  may  speedily  pass  away.  Yet 
if  God  wills  that  it  continue  until  all  the  wealth  piled  up  by  the  bond 
man's  two  hundred  and  fifty  years  of  unrequited  toil  shall  be  sunk, 
and  until  every  drop  of  blood  drawn  with  the  lash  shall  be  paid 
by  another  drawn  with  the  sword,  as  was  said  three  thousand  years 

lHist.  of  Rebellion  (McPherson),  pp.  460-508. 


Proposed  Concessions  to  Slavery          139 

ago,  so  still  it  must  be  said,  '  The  judgments  of  the  Lord  are  true 
and  righteous  altogether.' 

"  With  malice  toward  none,  with  charity  for  all  ;  with  firmness  in 
the  right  as  God  gives  us  to  see  the  right,  let  us  strive  on  to  finish 
the  work  we  are  in  ;  to  bind  up  the  nation's  wounds  ;  to  care  for 
him  who  shall  have  borne  the  battle,  and  for  his  widow,  and  his 
orphan — to  do  all  which  may  achieve  and  cherish  a  just  and  lasting 
peace  among  ourselves,  and  with  all  nations." 

XXV 

PROPOSED   CONCESSIONS  TO  SLAVERY — BUCHANAN'S   ADMINISTRATION 
AND    CONGRESS — l86o-I 

The  manner  of  receiving  and  treating  the  secession  of  the 
States  by  the  administration  of  Buchanan  and  the  Thirty- 
Sixth  Congress  can  only  here  have  a  brief  notice.  There  was 
a  pretty  general  disposition  to  make  further  concessions  and 
compromises  to  appease  the  disunion  sentiment  of  the  South. 
His  administration  was  weak  and  vacillating.  Two  serious 
attempts  at  conciliation  were  made.  President  Buchanan,  in 
his  last  Annual  Message  (December  4,  1860),  while  declaring 
that  the  election  of  any  one  to  the  office  of  President  was  not 
a  just  cause  for  dissolving  the  Union,  and  while  denying  that 

Secession  "  could  be  justified  under  the  Constitution,  yet 
announced  his  conclusion  that  the  latter  had  not  "  delegated 
to  Congress  the  power  to  coerce  a  State  into  submission  which 
is  attempting  to  withdraw,  or  has  actually  withdrawn,  from  the 
Confederacy";  that  coercion  was  "  not  among  the  specific 
and  enumerated  powers  granted  to  Congress."  He  did  not 
think  it  was  constitutional  to  preserve  the  Constitution  or  the 
Union  of  the  States.  This  view  was  held  by  most  leaders  of 
his  party  at  the  time  and  throughout  the  ensuing  war;  not 
so,  however,  by  the  rank  and  file. 

Buchanan  did  not  believe  that  self-preservation  inhered  in 
the  Constitution  or  the  Union. 

The  President  in  this  Message  suggested  an  explanatory 
amendment  to  the  Constitution:  (i)  To  recognize  the  right 


140  Political  History  of  Slavery 

of  property  in  slaves  in  the  States  where  it  existed ;  (2)  to 
protect  this  right  in  the  Territories  until  they  were  admitted 
as  States  with  or  without  slavery ;  (3)  a  like  recognition  of  the 
right  of  the  master  to  have  his  escaped  slave  delivered  up  to 
him ;  and  (4)  declaring  all  unfriendly  State  laws  impairing  this 
right  unconstitutional. 

This  was  the  signal  for  the  presentation  of  a  numerous  brood 
of  propositions  to  amend  the  Constitution  in  the  interest  of 
slavery,  and  by  way  of  concessions  to  the  South. 

A  committee  of  thirty-three,  one  from  each  State,  of  which 
Thomas  Corwin  of  Ohio  was  chairman,  was  (December  4, 
1860)  appointed  to  consider  the  part  of  the  President's  Mes 
sage  referred  to. 

Mr.  Noel  of  Missouri  proposed  to  instruct  this  committee  to 
report  on  the  expediency  of  abolishing  the  office  of  President, 
and  in  lieu  thereof  establishing  an  Executive  Council  of  three, 
elected  by  districts  composed  of  contiguous  States — each 
member  armed  with  a  veto  power ;  and  he  also  proposed  to 
restore  the  equilibrium  of  the  States  by  dividing  slave  States 
into  two  or  more. 

Mr.  Hindman  of  Arkansas  proposed  to  amend  the  Constitu 
tion  so  as  to  expressly  recognize  slavery  in  the  States ;  to  pro 
tect  it  in  the  Territories;  to  allow  slaves  to  be  transported 
through  free  States ;  to  prohibit  representation  in  Congress  to 
any  State  passing  laws  impairing  the  Fugitive-Slave  Act; 
giving  slave  States  a  negative  upon  all  acts  relating  to  slavery, 
and  making  such  amendments  unalterable. 

Mr.  Florence  of  Pennsylvania  and  Mr.  Kellogg  of  Illinois 
each  proposed  to  amend  the  Constitution  "  granting  the  right 
to  hold  slaves  in  all  territory  south  of  36°  30',  and  prohibiting 
slavery  in  territory  north  of  this  line,"  etc. 

Mr.  Vallandingham  of  Ohio  proposed  a  long  amendment  to 
the  Constitution,  the  central  idea  of  which  was  a  division  of 
the  Union  into  four  sections,  with  a  complicated  and  neces 
sarily  impracticable  plan  of  voting  in  Congress,  and  of  voting 
for  the  election  of  President  and  Vice-President. 

These  are  only  samples  of  the  many  propositions  to  amend 


Proposed  Concessions  to  Slavery          141 

the  Constitution,  but  they  will  suffice  for  all.  None  of  them 
had  the  approval  of  both  Houses  of  Congress. 

There  were  many  patriotic  propositions  offered  looking  to 
the  preservation  of  the  Union  as  it  was.  They  too  failed. 

The  great  committee  reported  (January  14,  1861)  five  prop 
ositions.  The  first  a  series  of  resolutions  declaratory  of  the 
duty  of  Congress  and  the  government  to  the  States,  and  in 
relation  to  slavery  ;  the  second  an  amendment  to  the  Constitu 
tion  relating  to  slavery;  the  third  a  bill  for  the  admission  of 
New  Mexico,  including  therein  Arizona,  as  a  State  ;  the  fourth 
a  bill  amending  and  making  more  efficient  the  Fugitive-Slave 
Law,  among  other  things  giving  the  United  States  Commis 
sioner  ten  dollars  whether  he  remanded  or  discharged  the 
alleged  fugitive;  and  the  fifth  a  bill  for  the  rendition  of  fugi 
tives  from  justice.  These  several  propositions  (save  the  fifth, 
which  was  rejected)  passed  the  House,  the  proposed  constitu 
tional  amendment  of  the  committee  being  amended  on  mo 
tion  of  Mr.  Corwin  before  its  passage. 

None  of  the  propositions  were  considered  in  the  Senate  save 
the  second,  and  even  this  one  did  not  receive  the  support  of 
the  secessionists  still  lingering  in  Congress. 

The  proposition  to  amend  the  Constitution  passed  both 
Houses  by  the  requisite  two  thirds  vote.  It  read : 

"  Art.  XIII.  No  amendment  shall  be  made  to  the  Constitution 
which  will  authorize  or  give  to  Congress  the  power  to  abolish  or  in 
terfere,  within  any  State,  with  the  domestic  institutions  thereof, 
including  that  of  persons  held  to  labor  or  service  by  the  laws  of 
any  State." 

Two  States  only — Maryland  and  Ohio 1 — ratified  this  proposed 
amendment.  It  was  needless,  and,  if  adopted,  would  have 
taken  no  power  from  Congress  which  any  respectable  party 
had  ever  claimed  it  possessed,  but  the  amendment  was  tendered 
to  answer  the  false  cry  that  slavery  in  the  slave  States  was  in 
danger  from  Congressional  action. 

(What  a  contrast  between  this  proposed  Thirteenth  Amend- 

1  Joint  resolution  of  ratification,  Ohio  Laws,  1861,  p.  190. 


142  Political  History  of  Slavery 

ment  to  the  Constitution  and  the  Thirteenth  Amendment 
adopted  four  years  later!  The  former  proposed  to  establish 
slavery  forever;  the  latter  abolished  it  forever.) 

The  resolutions  of  John  J.  Crittenden  in  the  Senate  pro 
posed  various  amendments  to  the  Constitution,  among  others 
to  legalize  slavery  south  of  36°  30' ;  to  admit  States  from  ter 
ritory  north  of  that  line,  with  or  without  slavery;  to  prohibit 
the  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  States  and  also  in  the  District 
of  Columbia  so  long  as  it  existed  in  Virginia  or  Maryland, 
such  abolition  even  then  to  be  only  with  the  consent  of  the 
inhabitants  of  the  District  and  with  compensation  to  the 
slave  owners;  to  require  the  Unifed  States  to  pay  for  fugitive 
slaves  who  were  prevented  from  arrest  or  return  to  slavery  by 
violence  or  intimidation,  and  to  make  all  the  provisions  of  the 
Constitution,  including  the  proposed  amendments,  unchange 
able  forever.  The  Crittenden  resolutions,  at  the  end  of  much 
debate,  and  after  various  votes  on  amendments  proposed 
thereto,  failed  (19  to  20)  in  the  Senate,  and  therefore  were 
never  considered  in  the  House.1 

It  was  claimed  at  the  time  that  had  the  Congressmen  from 
the  Southern  States  remained  and  voted  for  the  Corwin  and 
Crittenden  propositions  the  Constitution  might  have  been 
amended,  giving  slavery  all  these  guarantees. 

XXVI 

PEACE    CONFERENCE l86l 

By  appointments  of  governors  or  legislatures,  commissioners 
from  each  of  twenty  States,  chosen  at  the  request  of  the  Leg 
islature  of  Virginia,  met  in  Washington,  February  4,  1861,  in 
a  "Peace  Conference."  2  Ex-President  John  Tyler  of  Virginia 
was  made  President,  and  Crafts  J.  Wright  of  Ohio  Secretary.3 

1  Hist,  of  Rebellion  (McPherson),  pp.  57-67. 

2  Kansas  joined  later,  and  Michigan,  California,  and  Oregon  were  not  repre 
sented  ;  nor  were  the  then  seceded  Southern  States,  or  Arkansas,  represented. 

3  Elaine  (Twenty   Years  of  Congress,  vol.  i.,  p.  269),  says:    "  Puelston,  a  dele 
gate  from  Pennsylvania,  a  subject  of  Queen  Victoria,  later  (1884)  of  the  British 


Peace  Conference,  1861  143 

It  adjourned  February  27th,  having  agreed  to  recommend 
to  the  several  States  amendments  to  the  Constitution,  in  sub 
stance  :  That  north  of  36°  30'  slavery  in  the  Territories  shall 
be,  and  south  of  that  line  it  shall  not  be,  prohibited;  that 
neither  Congress  nor  a  Territorial  Legislature  shall  pass  any 
law  to  prevent  slaves  from  being  taken  from  the  States  to  the 
Territories;  that  no  Territory  shall  be  acquired  by  the  United 
States,  except  by  discovery  and  for  naval  stations,  without 
the  consent  of  a  majority  of  the  Senators  from  the  slave  and 
also  from  the  free  States;  that  Congress  shall  have  no  power 
to  abolish  slavery  in  any  State,  nor  in  the  District  of  Columbia 
without  the  consent  of  Maryland ;  nor  to  prohibit  Congress 
men  from  taking  their  slaves  to  and  from  said  District;  nor 
the  power  to  prohibit  the  free  transportation  of  slaves  from 
one  slave  State  or  Territory  to  another;  that  bringing  slaves 
into  the  District  of  Columbia  for  sale,  or  to  be  placed  in  depot 
for  transfer  and  sale  at  other  places,  is  prohibited ;  that  the 
clauses  in  the  Constitution  and  its  amendments  relating  to 
slavery  shall  never  be  abolished  or  amended  without  the  con 
sent  of  all  the  States;  and  that  Congress  shall  provide  by  law 
for  paying  owners  for  escaped  slaves  where  officers,  whose  duty 
it  was  to  arrest  them,  were  prevented  from  arresting  them  or 
returning  them  to  their  owners  after  being  arrested. 

The  Peace  Conference  "  was  composed  of  133  members, 
among  whom  were  some  of  the  most  eminent  men  of  the 
country,  though  generally,  however,  only  conservatives  from 
each  section  were  selected  as  members.  Its  remarkable  recom 
mendations  were  made  with  considerable  unanimity,  voting  in 
the  conference  being  by  States,  the  Continental  method. 

Wm.  Pitt  Fessenden  and  Lot  M.  Morrill  of  Maine,  Geo.  S. 
Boutwell  of  Massachusetts,  David  Dudley  Field  and  Erastus 
Corning  of  New  York,  Frederick  T.  Frelinghuysen  of  New 

Parliament,  was  chosen  Secretary  of  the  Conference." — This  is  an  error.      He  was 
not  a  delegate  :  only  one  of  several  assistant  secretaries. 

On  the  next  page  of  Elaine's  book  he  falls  into  another  error  in  saying  the 
Wilmot  Proviso  was  embodied  (1848)  in  the  Oregon  territorial  act.  It  was  never 
embodied  in  any  act.  The  sixth  section  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787  is  embodied  in 
that  act  word  for  word. 


144  Political  History  of  Slavery 

Jersey,  David  Wilmot  of  Pennsylvania,  Reverdy  Johnson  of 
Maryland,  John  Tyler,  Wm.  C.  Rives,  and  John  A.  Seddon 
of  Virginia,  Wm.  O.  Butler,  James  B.  Clay,  James  Guthrie, 
and  Charles  A.  Wickcliffe  of  Kentucky,  C.  P.  Wolcott,  Salmon 
P.  Chase,  John  C.  Wright,  Wm.  S.  Groesback,  Franklin  T. 
Backus,  Reuben  Hitchcock,  Thomas  Ewing  (Sen.),  and  Valen 
tine  B.  Horton  of  Ohio,  Caleb  B.  Smith  and  Godlove  S.  Orth 
of  Indiana,  John  M.  Palmer  and  Burton  C.  Cook  of  Illinois, 
and  James  Harlan  and  James  W.  Grimes  of  Iowa  were  of  the 
number.  Many  of  them  were  then,  or  afterwards,  celebrated 
as  statesmen ;  and  some  of  them  subsequently  held  high  rank 
as  soldiers. 

March  2,  1861,  the  "  Peace  Conference  "  propositions  were 
offered  twice  to  the  Senate,  and  each  time  overwhelmingly 
defeated,  as  they  had  been,  on  the  day  preceding,  by  the 
House.1 

There  were  many  other  propositions  offered,  considered,  and 
defeated,  to  wit:  propositions  from  the  Senate  Committee  of 
thirteen  appointed  December  18,  1860;  propositions  of  Doug 
las,  Seward,  and  others;  also  propositions  from  a  meeting  of 
Senators  and  members  from  the  border,  free,  and  slave  States, 
all  relating  to  slavery,  and  proposed  with  a  view  of  stopping 
the  already  precipitated  secession  of  States.2 

Some  of  these  propositions  were  exasperatingly  humiliating, 
and  only  possibly  justifiable  by  the  times. 

Though  Lincoln's  election  as  President  was  claimed  to  be  a 
good  cause  for  secession,  and  though  much  of  the  compromise 
talk  was  to  appease  his  party  opponents  as  well  as  the  South, 
he  was  opposed  to  bargaining  himself  into  the  office  to  which 
the  people  had  elected  him.  With  respect  to  this  matter 
(January  30,  1861)  he  said: 

"  I  will  suffer  death  before  I  will  consent,  or  advise  my  friends  to 
consent,  to  any  concession  or  compromise  which  looks  like  buying 
the  privilege  of  taking  possession  of  the  government  to  which  we 
have  a  constitutional  right." 

^  Hist,  of  Rebellion  (McPherson),  pp.  68-9.  2  Ibid.,  p.  76. 


Slavery  Abolished  in  District  of  Columbia  145 

We  have  now  done  with  legislation,  attempted  legislation, 
and  constitutional  amendments  to  protect  and  extend  slavery 
in  the  Republic.  Slavery  appealed  to  war,  and  by  the  inexor 
able  decree  of  war  its  fate  must  be  decided. 

The  Emancipation  Proclamation  of  Abraham  Lincoln  (Janu 
ary  i,  1863)  and  the  Thirteenth  Amendment  to  the  Constitution 
(1865)  freed  all  slaves  in  all  the  Union  ;  the  Fourteenth  Amend 
ment  (1868)  provided  that  "  all  persons  born  or  naturalized  in 
the  United  States,  and  subject  to  the  jurisdiction  thereof,  are 
citizens  of  the  United  States  and  of  the  State  wherein  they 
reside  "  ;  and  the  Fifteenth  Amendment  (1870)  gave  the  right 
to  vote  to  all  citizens  of  the  United  States  regardless  of  "  race, 
color,  or  previous  condition  of  servitude."  These  are  all  simply 
the  decrees  of  war,  written  in  the  organic  law  of  the  United 
States  at  the  end  of  the  nation's  four  years'  baptism  of  blood. 
Embodied  in  them  are  no  concessions  or  compromises;  the 
evil  was  torn  out  by  the  roots,  and  the  Christian  world,  the 
progressive  civilization  of  the  age,  and  the  consciences  of  en 
lightened  mankind  now  approve  what  was  done. 

The  war,  with  its  attendant  horrors  and  evils,  was  necessary 
to  terminate  the  deep-seated,  time-honored,  and  unholy  in 
stitution  of  human  slavery,  so  long  embedded  in  our  social, 
political,  and  commercial  relations,  and  sustained  by  our  pre 
judices,  born  of  a  selfish  disposition,  common  to  white  people, 
to  esteem  themselves  superior  to  others. 

The  history  of  emancipation  and  of  these  constitutional 
amendments  belongs,  logically,  to  periods  during  and  at  the 
end  of  the  war. 

There  are,  however,  two  important  acts  relating  to  slavery 
which  passed  Congress  during  the  War  of  the  Rebellion,  not 
strictly  the  result  of  that  war,  though  incident  to  it,  which 
must  be  mentioned. 

XXVII 

DISTRICT    OF    COLUMBIA SLAVERY    ABOLISHED — 1862 

The  District  of  Columbia,  acquired  by  the  United  States  in 
1791  for  the  purpose  of  founding  the  city  of  Washington  as  the 

VOL.  I. — 10. 


146  Political  History  of  Slavery 

permanent  Federal  Capital,  was,  by  the  laws  of  Virginia  and 
Maryland,  slave  territory.  The  District  was  originally  ten 
miles  square,  and  included  the  city  of  Alexandria.  Later 
(1846)  the  part  acquired  from  Virginia  (about  forty  square 
miles)  was  retroceded  to  that  State.  Congress  had  complete 
jurisdiction  over  it,  though  the  laws  of  Maryland  and  Virginia, 
for  some  purposes,  were  continued  in  force.  It  was,  however, 
from  the  beginning  claimed  that  Congress  had  the  right  to 
abolish  slavery  within  its  boundaries. 

Congress  is  given  the  right  "  to  exercise  exclusive  legislation 
in  all  cases  whatsoever  over  such  District."  '  But  slavery  was 
claimed  to  be  excepted  because  of  its  peculiar  character. 

The  institution  of  slavery  was  therefore  perpetuated  in  the 
District,  and  in  the  Capital  of  the  Republic  slave-marts  existed 
where  men  and  women  were  sold  from  the  auction  block,  and 
families  were  torn  asunder  and  carried  to  different  parts  of 
the  country  to  be  continued  in  bondage.  In  the  shadow  of  the 
Capitol  the  voice  of  the  auctioneer  proclaiming  in  the  accus 
tomed  way  the  merits  of  the  slave  commingled  with  that  of 
the  statesman  in  the  Halls  of  Congress  proclaiming  the 
boasted  liberty  of  the  great  American  Republic!  Daniel 
Dray  ton  (1848)  was  tried  in  the  District  for  the  larceny  of 
seventy-four  human  beings,  his  crime  consisting  of  affording 
means  (in  the  schooner  Pearl)  for  their  escape  to  freedom.2 

1  Con.  U.  S.,  Art.  I.,  Sec.  8,  par.  17. 

2  Drayton  did  not  succeed  in  the  attempt  to  afford  these  slaves  means  to  escape. 
He  was  tried  on  two  indictments  for  larceny,  convicted,  and  on  each  sentenced 
to  ten  years  in  the  penitentiary.     The  Circuit  Court  reversed  these  convictions  on 
the  erroneous  charge  of  the  trial  judge  (Crawford),  to  the  effect  that  a  man  might 
be  guilty  of  larceny  of  property — slaves — without  the  intent  to  appropriate  it  to 
his  own  use.     On  re-trial  Drayton  was  acquitted  on  the  larceny  indictments;  but 
verdicts  were  taken  against  him  on  seventy-four  indictments  for  transporting  slaves 
— not  a  penitentiary  offence — and  he  was  sentenced  to  pay  a  fine  of  $10,000,  and 
to  remain  in  prison  until  paid.     He  was  most  ably  defended  by  Horace  Mann  of 
Boston,  and  J.  M.  Carlisle  of  Washington,  D.  C.,  either  as  volunteer  counsel  or 
employed  by  Drayton's  friends,  he  being  poor.      There  were  115 — 41  for  larceny, 
64  for  transportation — indictments  against  Drayton,  which  led  Mr.  Mann  to  re 
mark  of  the  threatened  penalty  :   "  Methuselah  himself  must  have  been  caugJit 
young  in  order  to  survive  such  a  sentence." — Slavery,  Letters,  etc.   (Mann),  p.  93. 

President  Fillmore,  being  defeated  in  1852  for  nomination  for  President,  par- 


Slavery  Abolished  in  Territories  147 

Under  the  laws  of  the  District  many  others  were  punished 
for  like  offences. 

As  late  as  1856,  when  the  sculptor  Crawford  furnished  a  de 
sign  for  the  Statue  of Liberty 'to  crown  the  dome  of  the  Capitol, 
Secretary  of  War  Jefferson  Davis  ordered  the  "  liberty  cap  " 
struck  from  the  model,  because  in  art  it  had  an  "  established 
origin  in  its  use  as  a  badge  of  the  freed  slave."  ' 

We  have  seen  how  much  the  consciences  of  just  men  were 
shocked,  and  how  assiduously  such  men  labored  to  abolish 
slavery  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  and  with  what  tenacity 
the  slave  party  fought  to  mainitain  it  there,  and  even  by  con 
stitutional  amendments  to  fix  it  there  forever. 

But  when  slavery  had  brought  the  country  to  war,  the 
emancipation  of  slaves  in  the  District  was  early  considered. 

Henry  Wilson  of  Massachusetts,  December  16,  1861,  intro 
duced  a  bill  in  the  Senate,  which,  after  a  most  memorable  de 
bate  in  both  Houses  of  Congress,  passed,  and  on  April  16, 
1862,  became  a  law,  writh  the  approval  of  President  Lincoln. 
This  act  emancipated  forthwith  all  the  slaves  of  the  District, 
and  annulled  the  laws  of  Maryland  over  it  relating  to  slavery 
and  all  statutes  giving  the  cities  of  Washington  and  George 
town  authority  to  pass  ordinances  discriminating  against  per 
sons  of  color. 

XXVIII 

SLAVERY    PROHIBITED    IN    THE    TERRITORIES — 1862 

Growing  out  of  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  District  of 
Columbia,  the  question  was  raised  by  Lovejoy  of  Illinois  and 
others  as  to  the  duty  of  Congress  to  declare  freedom  national 
and  slavery  sectional ;  also  to  prohibit  slavery  in  all  the  Terri 
tories  of  the  Union. 

doned  Drayton  after  four  years'  and  four  months'  imprisonment,  which  pardon,  it 
was  claimed,  defeated  Scott,  the  Whig  nominee  at  the  polls. — Memoir  of  Drayton, 
p.  nS. 

1  Correspondence  in  War  Department  between  Davis  and  Quartermaster-General 
Meigs. 

The  present  nondescript  hood,  giving  the  statue  crowning  the  dome  its  appear 
ance,  in  some  views,  of  a  wild  Indian,  was  substituted  for  the  Liberty  cap. 


148  Political  History  of  Slavery 

A  bill  was  passed,  which  (June  19,  1862)  was  approved  by 
the  President,  and  became  the  last  general  law  of  Congress  on 
the  subject  of  slavery  in  the  Territories.  It  reads: 

"  That  from  and  after  the  passage  of  this  act  there  shall  be  neither 
slavery  nor  involuntary  servitude  in  any  of  the  Territories  of  the 
United  States,  now  existing,  or  which  may  at  any  time  hereafter  be 
formed  or  acquired  by  the  United  States,  otherwise  than  in  punish 
ment  of  crimes  whereof  the  party  shall  have  been  duly  convicted." 

By  this  act  the  principles  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787  (sixth 
section)  were  applied  universally  to  all  existing  and  to  be 
acquired  territory  of  the  United  States. 

It  was  only,  in  effect,  Jefferson's  Ordinance  of  1784,  defeated 
by  one  vote  in  the  old  Congress,  the  loss  of  which  he  deplored 
so  much.  His  benign  purpose  to  restrict  slavery  was  delayed 
seventy-eight  years — until  blood  flowed  to  sanction  it. 

XXIX 

BENTON'S  SUMMARY 

We  close  this  already  too  long  history  of  human  slavery  in 
the  United  States  with  Thomas  H.  Benton's  summary  of  the 
"  cardinal  points  "  in  the  aggressive  policy  of  the  impetuous 
South  in  pushing  forward  slavery  as  a  cause  for  disunion.  He 
wrote,  four  years  anterior  to  the  Rebellion  of  1861,  with  a 
prophetic  pen,  nibbed  by  the  experience  of  a  Senator  for  thirty 
years,  and  as  a  slaveholder.  He  had  actively  participated  in 
most  of  the  events  of  which  he  speaks,  and  was  personally 
familiar  with  all  of  them.1 

"  But  I  am  not  now  writing  the  history  of  the  present  slavery 
agitation — a  history  which  the  young  have  not  learnt,  and  the  old 
have  forgotten,  and  which  every  American  ought  to  understand.  I 
only  indicate  cardinal  points  to  show  its  character  ;  and  of  these  a 
main  one  remains  to  be  stated.  Up  to  Mr.  Pierce's  administration 
the  plan  had  been  defensive — that  is  to  say,  to  make  the  secession 
1  Hist.,  etc.,  Ex.,  Dred  Scott  Case,  pp.  184-5. 


Prophecy  as  to  Slavery's  Fate  149 

of  the  South  a  measure  of  self-defence  against  the  abolition  en 
croachments,  aggressions,  and  crusades  of  the  North.  In  the  time 
of  Mr.  Pierce,  the  plan  became  offensive — that  is  to  say,  to  com 
mence  the  expansion  of  slavery,  and  the  acquisition  of  territory  to 
spread  it  over,  so  as  to  overpower  the  North  with  new  slave  States, 
and  drive  them  out  of  the  Union.  In  this  change  of  tactics  origi 
nated  the  abrogation  of  the  Missouri  Compromise,  the  attempt  to 
purchase  the  one  half  of  Mexico,  and  the  actual  purchase  of  a  large 
part ;  the  design  to  take  Cuba  ;  the  encouragement  to  Kinney  and 
to  Walker  in  Central  America  ;  the  quarrels  with  Great  Britain  for 
outlandish  coasts  and  islands  ;  the  designs  upon  the  Tehuantepec, 
the  Nicaragua,  the  Panama,  and  the  Darien  routes  ;  and  the  scheme 
to  get  a  foothold  in  the  Island  of  San  Domingo.  The  rising  in  the 
free  States  in  consequence  of  the  abrogation  of  the  Missouri  Com 
promise  checked  these  schemes,  and  limited  the  success  of  the 
disunionists  to  the  revival  of  the  agitation  which  enables  them  to 
wield  the  South  against  the  North  in  all  the  Federal  elections  and 
Federal  legislation.  Accidents  and  events  have  given  this  party  a 
strange  pre-eminence — under  Jackson's  administration  proclaimed 
for  treason  ;  since,  at  the  head  of  the  government  and  of  the 
Democratic  party.  The  death  of  Harrison,  and  the  accession  of 
Tyler,  was  their  first  great  lift  ;  the  election  of  Mr.  Pierce  was  their 
culminating  point.  It  not  only  gave  them  the  government,  but 
power  to  pass  themselves  for  the  Union  party,  and  for  democrats  ; 
and  to  stigmatize  all  who  refused  to  go  with  them  as  disunionists 
and  abolitionists.  And  to  keep  up  this  classification  is  the  object 
of  the  eleven  pages  of  the  message  which  calls  for  this  Review — 
unhappily  assisted  in  that  object  by  the  conduct  of  a  few  real 
abolitionists  (not  five  per  centum  of  the  population  of  the  free 
States)  ;  but  made  to  stand,  in  the  eyes  of  the  South,  for  the 
whole." 

XXX 

PROPHECY    AS    TO    SLAVERY'S    FATE  :     ALSO    AS    TO    DISUNION 

We  are  approaching  the  period  for  the  fulfilment  of  prophecy 
in  relation  to  the  perpetuity  of  human  slavery  in  the  United 
States. 

We  summarize  a  few  of  the  prophecies  made  by  distinguished 


150  Political  History  of  Slavery 

/  American    statesmen    and     citizens.        George    Washington, 

Patrick  Henry,  and  other  Virginia  statesmen  and  slaveholders 

at  the  close  of  the  Revolution  predicted  that  slaves  would  be 

emancipated,  or  they  would  acquire  their  freedom  violently. 

\     These  patriots  advocated  emancipation.     The  stumbling-block 

j  to  abolition  in  Virginia  at  that  time  was,  what  to  do  with  the 
blacks.  The  white  population  could  not  reconcile  themselves 
to  the  idea  of  living  on  an  equality  with  them,  as  they  deemed 
they  must  if  the  blacks  were  free.  As  early  as  1782  Jefferson 
expressed  his  serious  forebodings : 

"Nothing  is  more  certainly  written  in  the  book  of  fate  than  that 
these  people  are  to  be  free  ;  nor  is  it  less  certain  that  the  two  races, 
equally  free,  cannot  live  in  the  same  government.  . 

"  I  tremble  for  my  country  when  I  reflect  that  God  is  just,  that 
His  justice  cannot  sleep  forever.  The  way,  I  hope,  is  preparing, 
under  the  auspices  of  Heaven,  for  a  total  emancipation." 

The  anti-slavery  societies  when  they  first  met  in  annual 
convention  (1804)  proclaimed  that 

"  Freedom  and  slavery  cannot  long  exist  together." 
John  Quincy  Adams,  in  1843,  prophesied: 

"  I  am  satisfied  slavery  will  not  go  down  until  it  goes  down  in 
blood."  ' 

Abraham  Lincoln,  at  the  beginning  of  his  celebrated  debate 
with  Douglas  (1858)  expressed  his  belief  that  this  nation  could 
not  exist  "  half  slave  and  half  free."  He  had,  however,  made 
the  same  declaration  in  a  letter  to  a  Kentucky  friend  to  whom 
he  wrote : 

"  Experience  has  demonstrated,  I  think,  that  there  is  no  peaceful 
extinction  of  slavery  in  prospect  for  us.  ... 

"  On  the  question  of  liberty  as  a  principle,  we  are  not  what  we 
have  been.  When  we  were  the  political  slaves  of  King  George, 
and  wanted  to  be  free,  we  called  the  maxim  that  *  all  men  are 

1  Life  of  Seward,  vol.  i.,  p.  672. 


Prophecy  as  to  Slavery's  Fate  151 

created  equal  '  a  self-evident  truth  j  but  now,  when  we  have  grown 
fat,  and  have  lost  all  dread  of  being  slaves  ourselves,  we  have  be 
come  so  greedy  to  be  masters  that  we  call  the  maxim  '  a  self-evi 
dent  lie.'  The  Fourth  of  July  has  not  quite  dwindled  away  :  it  is 
still  a  great  day  for  burning  fire-crackers.  That  spirit  which  de 
sired  the  peaceful  extinction  of  slavery  has  itself  become  extinct 
with  the  occasion  and  the  men  of  the  Revolution.  ...  So  far 
as  peaceful,  voluntary  emancipation  is  concerned,  the  condition  of 
the  negro  slave  in  America,  scarcely  less  terrible  to  the  contempla 
tion  of  the  free  mind,  is  now  as  fixed  and  hopeless  of  change  for 
the  better  as  that  of  lost  souls  of  the  finally  impenitent.  The  au 
tocrat  of  all  the  Russias  will  resign  his  crown,  and  proclaim  his 
subjects  free  Republicans,  sooner  than  will  our  masters  voluntarily 
give  up  their  slaves. 

"  Our  political  problem  now  is,  '  Can  we  as  a  nation  continue  to 
gether  permanently — forever — half  slave,  and  half  free  '  ?  The 
problem  is  too  mighty  for  me.  May  God  in  his  mercy  superintend 
the  solution." 

(Under  God,  within  ten  years  after  this  was  written,  Lincoln 
was  the  instrument  for  the  solution  of  the  mighty  problem  /) 

This  was  a  fitting  prelude  to  his  speech  on  slavery  at  Spring 
field,  Illinois  (June,  1858),  wherein  he  said: 

"  In  my  opinion  it  will  not  cease  until  a  crisis  shall  have  been 
reached  and  passed.  '  A  house  divided  agamst  itself  cannot  stand' 

"  I  believe  this  government  cannot  endure,  permanently,  half 
slave  and  half  free.  I  do  not  expect  the  house  to  fall — but  I  do 
expect  it  will  cease  to  be  divided.  It  will  become  all  one  thing,  or 
all  the  other."  1 

Seward  of  New  York  compressed  the  issue  between  freedom 
and  slavery  into  a  single  sentence  in  his  Rochester  speech 
(October  25,  1858): 

"  It  is  an  irrepressible  conflict  between  opposing  and  enduring 
forces,  and  it  means  that  the  United  States  must  and  will,  sooner  or 
later,  become  either  entirely  a  slave  holding  nation  or  entirely  a 
free  labor  nation."  2 

1  A.  Lincoln,  Complete  Works,  vol.  i.,  pp.  215,  240,  251. 

2  Seward's  Works,  vol.  iv.,  p.  289. 


i52  Political  History  of  Slavery 

But  statesmen  were  not  the  only  persons  who  predicted  the 
downfall  of  slavery  in  the  Republic;  not  the  only  persons  who 
contributed  to  that  end,  nor  yet  the  only  persons  who  foretold 
its  overthrow  in  blood. 

The  institution  had  grown  so  arrogant  and  intolerant  as  to 
brook  no  opposition,  and  its  friends  did  not  even  seek  to  cloak 
its  enormities. 

A  leading  Southern  journal,  in  1854,  honestly  expressed  the 
affection  in  which  slavery  was  held : 

"  We  cherish  slavery  as  the  apple  of  our  eye,  and  we  are  resolved 
to  maintain  it,  peaceably,  if  we  can,  forcibly,  if  we  must."  1 

The  clergy  and  religious  people  of  the  North  came  to  be 
lieve  slavery  must,  in  the  mill  of  justice,  be  ground  to  a 
violent  death,  in  obedience  to  the  will  of  God. 

Theodore  Parker,  the  celebrated  Unitarian  divine,  a  per 
sonal  friend  of  John  Brown,  on  hearing,  in  Rome,  of  his  fail 
ure,  trial,  and  sentence  to  the  scaffold,  in  a  letter  to  Francis 
Jackson  of  Boston,  November  24,  1859,  gave  vent  to  what  was 
then  regarded  fanatical  prophecy,  but  now  long  since  fulfilled. 

"  The  American  people  will  have  to  march  to  rather  severe  music, 
I  think,  and  it  is  better  for  them  to  face  it  in  season.  A  few  years 
ago  it  did  not  seem  difficult,  first  to  check  slavery,  and  then  to  end 
it  without  bloodshed.  I  think  this  cannot  be  done  now,  nor  ever  in 
the  future.  All  the  great  charters  of  Humanity  have  been  writ  in 
blood.  I  once  hoped  that  American  Democracy  would  be  engrossed 
in  less  costly  ink  ;  but  it  is  plain,  now,  that  our  pilgrimage  must 
lead  through  a  Red  Sea,  wherein  many  a  Pharaoh  will  go  under 
and  perish.  .  . 

"  Slavery  will  not  die  a  dry  death.  It  may  have  as  many  lives  as 
a  cat  :  at  last,  it  will  die  like  a  mad  dog  in  a  village,  with  only  the 
enemies  of  the  human  kind  to  lament  its  fate,  and  they  too  cow 
ardly  to  appear  as  mourners." 5 

Parker  was  fast  descending,   from  broken  health,  into  the 

1  Hist.  U.  S.  (Rhodes),  vol.  i.,  p.  469. 

2  Life  of  Parker  (Weiss),  vol.  ii.,  pp.  172-4  (406) 


Prophecy  as  to  Slavery's  Fate  153 

grave,  but  in  the  wildest  of  his  dreams  he  did  not  peer  into 
futurity  far  enough  to  see  that  within  a  single  decade  the  "  sin 
of  the  nation  "  would  be  washed  out,  root  and  branch,  in  blood  ; 
and  that  in  Virginia — the  State  that  hung  John  Brown — at  the 
home  of  its  greatest  Governor,  Henry  A.  Wise,  there  would 
be  seen  "  a  Yankee  school-marm  "  teaching  free  negroes — sons 
of  Africa — to  read  and  write — to  read  the  Holy  Bible,  and  she 
the  humble  daughter  of  "  Old  John  Brown." 

One  sample  of  prophecy  of  what  disunion  would  be,  we  give 
from  a  speech  of  Henry  Winter  Davis  of  Maryland : 

"  It  would  be  an  act  of  suicide,  and  sane  men  do  not  commit 
suicide.  The  act  itself  is  insanity.  It  will  be  done,  if  ever,  in  a 
fury  and  madness  which  cannot  stop  to  reason.  Dissolution  means 
death,  the  suicide  of  Liberty,  without  a  hope  of  resurrection — death 
without  the  glories  of  immortality  ;  with  no  sister  to  mourn  her  fall, 
none  to  wrap  her  decently  in  her  winding-sheet  and  bear  her  ten 
derly  to  a  sepulchre — dead  Liberty,  left  to  all  the  horrors  of  cor 
ruption,  a  loathsome  thing,  with  a  stake  through  the  body,  which 
men  shun,  cast  out  naked  on  the  highway  of  nations,  where  the 
tyrants  of  the  earth  who  feared  her  living  will  mock  her  dead,  pass 
ing  by  on  the  other  side,  wagging  their  heads  and  thrusting  their 
tongues  in  their  cheeks  at  her,  saying,  '  Behold  her  now,  how  she  that 
was  fair  among  the  nations  is  fallen  !  is  fallen  ! ' — and  only  the  few 
wise  men  who  loved  her  out  of  every  nation  will  shed  tears  over  her 
desolation  as  they  pass,  and  cast  handfuls  of  earth  on  her  body  to 
quiet  her  manes,  while  we,  her  children,  stumble  about  her  ruined 
habitations  to  find  dishonorable  graves  wherein  to  hide  our  shame. 
Dissolution  ?  How  shall  it  be  ?  Who  shall  make  it  ?  Do  men 
dream  of  Lot  and  Abraham  parting,  one  to  the  East  and  the  other 
to  the  West,  peacefully,  because  their  servants  strive  ?  That  States 
will  divide  from  States  and  boundary  lines  will  be  marked  by  com 
pass  and  chain  ?  Sir,  that  will  be  a  portentous  commission  that 
shall  settle  that  partition,  for  cannon  will  be  planted  at  the  corners 
and  grinning  skeletons  be  finger-posts  to  point  the  way.  It  will  be 
no  line  gently  marked  on  the  bosom  of  the  Republic — some  mean 
dering  vein  whence  generations  of  her  children  have  drawn  their 

1  Civil  War  in  America  (Draper),  vol.  i.,  565-6. 


154  Political  History  of  Slavery 

nourishment — but  a  sharp  and  jagged  chasm,  rending  the  hearts  of 
commonwealths,  lacerated  and  smeared  with  fraternal  blood.  On 
the  night  when  the  stars  of  her  constellation  shall  fall  from  heaven 
the  blackness  of  darkness  forever  will  settle  on  the  liberties  of  man 
kind  in  this  Western  World.  This  is  dissolution!  If  such,  Sir,  is 
dissolution  as  seen  in  a  glass  darkly,  how  terrible  will  it  be  face  to 
face  ?  They  who  reason  about  it  are  half  crazy  now.  They  who 
talk  of  it  do  not  mean  it,  and  dare  not  mean  it.  They  who  speak 
in  earnest  of  a  dissolution  of  this  Union  seem  to  me  like  children 
or  madmen.  He  who  would  do  such  a  deed  as  that  would  be  the 
maniac  without  a  tongue  to  tell  his  deed,  or  reason  to  arrest  his 
steps — an  instrument  of  a  mad  impulse  impelled  by  one  idea  to 
strike  his  victim.  Sir,  there  have  been  maniacs  who  have  been  cured 
by  horror  at  the  blood  they  have  shed"  } 

This  eloquent,  patriotic,  word-picture  of  dissolution,  intended 
to  deter  those  who  so  impetuously  and  glibly  talked  of  it,  was 
not,  as  the  sequel  proved,  overdrawn.  When  delivered  it  was 
not  generally  believed  that  a  dissolution  of  the  Union  could  or 
would  be  attempted.  In  the  Presidential  campaigns  of  1856 
and  1860,  as  well  as  in  Congress,  there  was  much  eloquence 
displayed  in  line  with  the  above ;  few  of  the  orators,  however, 
believed  that  dissolution,  with  all  the  wild  terrors  of  war,  was 
near  at  hand.  But  there  were  some  men  in  public  life  who 
early  comprehended  the  destiny  awaiting  the  politically  storm- 
racked  Republic,  and  as  it  approached,  boldly  gave  the 
opinion  that  "  a  little  blood-letting  would  be  good  for  the  body 
politic:'  2 

The  story  of  the  war  which  secession  inaugurated  remains 
to  be  in  part  narrated  in  succeeding  chapters,  portraying  the 
impetuous  rush  to  battle;  the  unparalleled  heroism  of  the 
mighty  hosts  on  either  side;  the  slaughter  of  men;  the  hell  of 
suffering;  the  bitter  tears;  the  incalculable  sorrow;  the  billions 
expended  ;  the  destruction  of  property  ;  the  alternating  defeats 
and  triumphs;  the  final  victory  of  the  Union  arms;  the  over 
throw  of  state-rights,  nullification,  secession — disunion;  the 

1  Speech  of  Henry  Winter  Davis,  House  of  Representatives,  Aug.  7,  1856. 

2  Zachariah  Chandler,  1860. 


Prophecy  as  to  Slavery's  Fate  155 

emancipation  of  four  million  human  slaves,  and  the  annihila 
tion  in  the  United  States  of  the  institution  of  slavery,  including 
all  its  baleful  doctrines,  whether  advanced  by  partisan,  pro- 
slavery  statesmen,  or  advocated  by  learned  politicians,  or  up 
held  by  church  or  clergy  in  the  name  of  the  prophets  of  Holy 
Writ  or  of  Christ  and  his  Apostles,  or  expounded  by  a  tribunal 
clothed  in  the  ermine,  majesty,  dignity,  and  power  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  of  America. 

Abraham  Lincoln,  whose  beautiful  character  is  illumined  in 
the  intense  light  of  a  third  of  a  century  of  heightened  civiliza 
tion,  will  be  immortalized  through  all  time  as  God's  chiefest 
instrument  in  accomplishing  the  end. 

In  closing  this  chapter  we  desire  again  to  remind  the  reader 
tlia^fn  r-i 86 1  the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  by  a  two 
thirds  majority  in  each  branch,  voted  to  so  amend  the  Consti 
tution  as  to  make  forever  unalterable  its  provisions  for  the 
recognition  and  perpetuation  of  human  bondage;  that  if  the 
amendment  thus  submitted  had  been  ratified  by  three  fourths 
of  the  States,  this  nation  would  have  been  the  first  and  only 
one  in  the  history  of  the  world  wherein  the  right  to  enslave 
human  beings  was  fundamental  and  decreed  to  be  eternal. 

This  amendment,  guaranteeing  perpetual  slavery,  was  the 
tender  made  by  Union  men  in  1861  to  avert  disunion  and  war. 
It  was  the  humiliating  and  unholy  pledge  offered  to  a  slave- 
loving  people  to  induce  them  to  remain  true  to  the  Constitution 
and  the  Union.  In  the  providence  of  God  the  amendment 
was  not  ratified,  nor  was  a  willingness  to  accept  it  shown  by 
the  defiant  South.  On  the  contrary,  it  was  spurned  by  it  with 
singular  unanimity  and  deserved  contempt.  A  nation  to  be 
wholly  slave  was  alone  acceptable  to  the  disunionists;  and  to 
establish  such  a  nation  the  hosts  were  arrayed  on  one  side; 
to  preserve  and  perpetuate  the  Union  and  to  overthrow  the 
would-be  slave  nation,  they  were  also,  thank  God,  arrayed  on 
the  other. 

This  was  the  portentous  issue  made  up — triable  by  the 
tribunal  of  last  resort  from  which  there  is  no  earthly  appeal. 

Promptly,  even  enthusiastically,  did  the  South  respond  to 


156  Political  History  of  Slavery 

the  summons  to  battle,  and  with  a  heroism  worthy  of  a  holier 
cause  did  it  devote  life  and  property  to  the  maintenance  of  the 
Confederacy.  But  from  mountain,  hillside,  vale,  plain,  and 
prairie,  from  field,  factory,  counting-house,  city,  village,  and 
hamlet,  from  all  professions  and  occupations  alike  came  the 
sons  of  freedom,  with  the  cry  of  "  Union  and  Liberty,"  under 
one  flag,  to  meet  the  opposing  hosts,  heroically  ready  to  make 
the  necessary  sacrifice  that  the  unity  of  the  American  Repub 
lic  should  be  preserved. 

The  effort  to  establish  a  slave  nation  in  the  afternoon  of  the 
nineteenth  century  resulted  in  a  civil  war  unparalleled  in 
magnitude,  and  the  bloodiest  in  the  history  of  the  human 
race.  In  the  eleven  seceding  States  the  authority  of  the  Con 
stitution  was  thrown  off;  the  National  Government  was  defied  ; 
former  official  oaths  of  army,  navy,  and  civil  officers  were 
disregarded,  and  other  oaths  were  taken  to  support  another 
government;  the  public  property  of  the  United  States  was 
seized  in  the  seceding  States  as  of  right,  Cabinet  officers  of  the 
President  assisting  in  the  plunder;  Senators  and  Representa 
tives  in  Congress,  while  yet  holding  seats,  making  laws,  and 
drawing  pay,  plotted  treason,  and,  later,  defiantly  joined  the 
Confederacy ;  sequestration  acts  were  passed  by  the  Confeder 
ate  Congress,  and  citizens  of  the  United  States  were  made 
aliens  in  the  Confederacy,  and  their  property  there  was  con 
fiscated,  and  debts  due  loyal  men  North  were  collected  for  the 
benefit  of  the  Confederate  Treasury  ;  piratical  vessels,  with  the 
aid  and  connivance  of  boastful  civilised  monarchies  of  Europe, 
destroyed  our  commerce  and  drove  our  flag  from  the  high  seas; 
above  a  half  million  of  men  fell  in  battle,  and  another  half 
million  died  of  wounds  and  disease  incident  to  war;  above 
sixty  thousand  Union  soldiers  died  in  Southern  prisons;  the 
direct  cost  of  the  Rebellion,  paid  from  the  United  States 
Treasury,  approximated  seven  billions  of  dollars,  and  the  in 
direct  cost  to  the  loyal  people,  in  property  destroyed,  etc., 
was  at  least  equal  to  seven  billions  more.  Fairly  estimated, 
slaves  not  considered,  the  people  of  the  seceding  States  ex 
pended  and  lost  in  the  prosecution  and  devastations  of  the  war 


Prophecy  as  to  Slavery's  Fate  157 

more  than  double  the  expenditures  and  losses  of  the  North; 
imagination  cannot  compass  or  language  portray  the  suffering 
and  sorrow,  agony  and  despair,  which  pervaded  the  whole 
land.  All  this  to  settle  the  momentous  question,  whether  or 
not  human  slavery  should  be  fundamental  as  a  domestic,  social, 
and  political  institution. 

Thus  far  slavery  has  been  our  theme,  and  the  war  for  the 
suppression  of  the  Rebellion  only  incidentally  referred  to,  but 
in  succeeding  chapters  slavery  will  only  be  incidentally  re 
ferred  to,  and  the  war  have  such  attention  as  the  scope  of  the 
narrative  permits. 


CHAPTER  II 

SUMTER  FIRED  ON — SEIZURE  BY  CONFEDERATES  OF  ARMS, 
ARSENALS,  AND  FORTS — DISLOYALTY  OF  ARMY  AND  NAVY 
OFFICERS — PROCLAMATION  OF  LINCOLN  FOR  SEVENTY- 
FIVE  THOUSAND  MILITIA,  AND  PREPARATION  FOR  WAR 
ON  BOTH  SIDES 

THE  Star  of  the  West,  a  merchant  vessel,  was  sent  from  New 
York,  with  the  reluctant  consent  of  President  Buchanan, 
by  Lieutenant-General  Winfield  Scott,  Commander-in- 
Chief  of  the  army,  to  carry  re-enforcements  and  provisions  to 
Fort  Sumter.  As  this  vessel  attempted  to  enter  Charleston 
harbor  (January  9,  1861)  a  shot  was  fired  across  its  bows  which 
turned  it  back,  and  its  mission  failed.  "  Slapped  in  the 
mouth  "  was  the  opprobrious  epithet  used  to  express  this  in 
sult  to  the  United  States.  This  was  not  the  shot  that  sum 
moned  the  North  to  arms.  It  was,  however,  the  first  angry 
gun  fired  by  a  citizen  of  the  Union  against  his  country's  flag, 
and  it  announced  the  dawn  of  civil  war.  When  this  shot  was 
fired,  only  South  Carolina  had  passed  an  Ordinance  of  Seces 
sion;  the  Confederate  States  were  not  yet  formed. 

On  the  night  of  December  26,  1860,  Major  Robert  Anderson, 
in  command  of  the  land  forces,  forts,  and  defences  at  Charles 
ton,  South  Carolina,  being  threatened  by  armed  secession 
troops,  and  regarding  his  position  at  Fort  Moultrie,  on  Sulli 
van's  Island,  untenable  if  attacked  from  the  land  side,  as  a 
matter  of  precaution,  without  orders  from  his  superiors,  but 
possessing  complete  authority  within  the  limits  of  his  com 
mand,  removed  his  small  force,  consisting  of  only  sixty-five 
soldiers,  from  Fort  Moultrie  to  Fort  Sumter,  where,  at  high 

158 


GENERAL    ULYSSES    S.    GRANT,    U.S.A. 
{From  a  photograph  taken  in  1865.) 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War     159 

noon  of  the  next  day,  after  a  solemn  prayer  by  his  chaplain, 
the  Stars  and  Stripes  were  run  up  on  a  flagstaff,  to  float  in 
triumph  only  for  a  short  time,  then  to  be  insulted  and  shot 
down,  not  to  again  be  unfurled  over  the  same  fort  until  four 
years  of  war  had  intervened. 

An  ineffectual  effort  was  made  by  Governor  Pickens  of  South 
Carolina  to  induce  Major  Anderson  by  demands  and  threats 
to  return  to  his  defenceless  position  at  Fort  Moultrie.  Presi 
dent  Buchanan,  at  the  instigation  of  his  Secretary  of  War, 
Floyd,  was  on  the  point  of  ordering  him  to  do  so,  but  when 
the  matter  was  considered  in  a  Cabinet  meeting,  other  counsels 
prevailed,  and  Floyd  made  this  his  excuse  for  leaving  the 
Cabinet.1  Fortunately,  his  place  was  filled  by  Hon.  Joseph 
Holt  of  Kentucky,  a  Union  man  of  force,  energy,  will  power, 
and  true  courage,  who,  later,  became  Judge  Advocate-General 
U.S.A.,  serving  as  such  until  after  the  close  of  the  war. 

To  the  end  of  Buchanan's  administration,  Sumter  was  held 
by  Major  Anderson  with  his  small  force,  and  around  it  cen 
tered  the  greatest  anxiety.  It  was  the  policy  of  the  South  to 
seize  and  occupy  all  forts,  arsenals,  dock-yards,  public  property, 
and  all  strongholds  belonging  to  the  United  States  located 
within  the  limits  of  seceded  States,  and  to  take  possession  of 
arms  and  material  of  war  as  though  of  right  belonging  to  them. 
The  right  and  title  to  United  States  property  thus  located 
were  not  regarded.  Louisiana  seized  the  United  States  Mint 
at  New  Orleans,  and  turned  over  of  its  contents  §536,000  in 
coin  to  the  Confederate  States  treasury,  for  which  she  received 


1  His  resignation  was  accepted  December  29,  1860.  Howell  Cobb  of  Georgia, 
Buchanan's  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  resigned  December  8,  1860,  and  was,  on 
February  4,  1861,  chosen  the  presiding  officer  of  the  first  Confederate  Congress. 
He  left  the  United  States  Treasury  empty.  Jacob  Thompson  of  Mississippi, 
Buchanan's  Secretary  of  Interior,  resigned  January  8,  1861.  He  had  corresponded 
with  secessionists  South,  and  while  yet  in  the  Cabinet  had  been  appointed  a  com 
missioner  by  his  State  to  urge  North  Carolina  to  secede.  He  became  an  aide  to 
Beauregard,  but  attained  no  military  distinction.  In  1864  he  went  to  Canada, 
and  there  promoted  a  plan  to  release  prisoners  at  Camp  Douglas,  Chicago,  and  to 
seize  the  city,  and  was  charged  with  instigating  plots  to  burn  New  York  and  other 
Northern  cities. 


i6o 


Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 


a.  vote  of  thanks  from  the  Confederate  Congress.1  All  the 
forts  of  the  United  States  within  or  on  the  coast  of  the  then 
seceded  States,  save  Forts  Sumter  and  Pickens,  were  soon, 
with  their  armament  and  military  supplies,  in  possession  of 
and  manned  by  Southern  soldiers.  At  first  seizures  were  made 
by  State  authority  alone,  but  on  the  organization,  at  Mont 
gomery,  of  the  Confederacy  (February  8,  1861)  it  assumed 
charge  of  all  questions  between  the  seceded  States  and  the 
United  States  relating  to  the  occupation  of  forts  and  other 
public  establishments;  and,  March  I5th,  the  Confederacy  called 


CONFEDERATE  SILVER  HALF  DOLLAR 

on  the  States  that  had  joined  it  to  cede  to  it  all  the  forts,  etc., 
thus  seized,  which  was  done  accordingly. 

On  February  28th  the  Confederate  Congress  passed  an  act 
under  which  President  Davis  assumed  control  of  all  military 

1  Am.  Cyclopaedia,  1861  (Appleton),  pp.  430,  431. 

It  is  interesting  to  note  that  Louisiana,  jointly  with  the  Confederate  States, 
issued  in  April  and  May,  1861,  made  from  captured  United  States  bullion,  on 
United  States  dies  of  1861,  gold  coin,  $254,820  in  double  eagles,  and  silver  coin, 
$1,101,316.50  in  half  dollars.  In  May,  1861,  the  remaining  bullion  was  transferred 
to  A.  J.  Guizot,  Assistant  Treasurer  Confederate  States  of  America,  who  at  once 
destroyed  the  United  States  dies  and  had  a  Confederate  States  die  for  silver  half 
dollars  engraved  by  the  coiner,  A.  H.  M.  Peterson.  From  this  die  four  pieces 
only  were  struck  on  a  screw  press,  the  die  being  of  such  high  relief  that  its  use  was 
impracticable.  These  four  coins  composed  the  entire  coinage  of  the  Confederate 
States.  Its  design,  Obverse :  Goddess  of  Liberty  (same  as  United  States  coins) 
with  arc  of  thirteen  stars  (representing  original  States),  date,  "  1861."  Reverse  : 
American  shield  beneath  a  "  Liberty  Cap  "  ;  union  of  shield  and  seven  stars  (rep 
resenting  original  seceded  States),  surrounded  by  a  wreath,  to  the  left  (cotton  in 
bloom),  to  the  right  (sugar  cane).  Legend:  "Confederate  States  of  America" 
exergue,  "Half  Dol" — U.  S.  (Townsend),  p.  427. 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War     161 

operations  and  received  from  the  seceding  States  all  the  arms 
and  munitions  of  war  acquired  from  the  United  States  and  all 
other  material  of  war  the  States  of  the  Confederacy  saw  proper 
to  turn  over  to  him. 

A  letter  from  the  Chief  of  Ordnance  of  the  United  States 
Army  to  Secretary  of  War  Holt,  of  date,  January  15,  1861, 
shows  that,  commencing  in  1859,  under  orders  from  Secretary 
of  War  Floyd,  115,000  muskets  were  transferred  from  the 
Springfield  (Mass.)  and  Watervliet  (N.  Y.)  arsenals  to  arsenals 
South ;  and,  under  like  orders,  other  percussion  muskets  and 
rifles  were  similarly  transferred,  all  of  which  were  seized,  to 
gether  with  many  cannon  and  other  material  of  war,  by  the 
Confederate  authorities.1 

Harper's  Ferry,  and  the  arsenal  there,  with  its  arms  and 
ordnance  stores,  were  seized  by  the  Confederates,  April  18, 
1861,  and  the  machinery  and  equipment  for  manufacturing 
arms,  not  burned,  were  taken  South. 

The  arsenal  at  Fayetteville,  N.  C.,  was  also  seized,  April  22, 
1861. 

In  February,  1861,  Beauregard  *  was  commissioned  by  Davis 
a  Brigadier-General,  and  ordered  to  Charleston,  South  Caro 
lina,  to  organize  an  army.  Other  officers  were  put  in  com 
mission  by  the  Confederacy,  and  a  large  force  was  soon 
mustering  defiantly  for  the  coming  struggle. 

Beauregard  took  command  at  Charleston,  March  1st,  three 
days  before  Lincoln  was  inaugurated  President  of  the  United 
States.3 

Disloyalty  extended  to  the  army  and  navy. 

The  regular  army  was  small,  and  widely  scattered  over  the 
Western  frontiers  and  along  the  coasts  of  lake  and  ocean. 
March  31,  1861,  it  numbered  16,507,  including  1074  officers. 
Some  officers  had  joined  the  secession  movement  before  this 
date. 

1  Am.  Cyclop.,  1861,  p.  123. 

2  P.  T.  G.  Beauregard  resigned,  February  20,  1861,  a  captaincy  in  the  United 
States  Army  while  holding  the  appointment  of  Superintendent  of  West  Point. 

3  Life  of  Beauregard  (Roman),  vol.  i.,  p.  25. 


VOL.  I. — II. 


1 62  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

The  disaffection  was  among  the  officers  alone.  Two  hundred 
and  eighty-two  officers  resigned  or  deserted  to  take  service 
in  the  Confederate  Army  ;  of  these  192  were  graduates  of  West 
Point  Military  Academy,  and  178  of  the  latter  became  general 
officers  during  the  war.1 

The  number  of  officers,  commissioned  and  warrant,  who  left 
the  United  States  Navy  and  entered  the  Confederate  service 
was,  approximately,  460. 2 

To  the  credit  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the  regular  army,  and  of 
the  seamen  of  the  navy,  it  is,  on  high  authority,  said  that : 

"  It  is  worthy  of  note  that,  while  in  this  government's  hour  of 
trial  large  numbers  of  those  in  the  army  and  navy  who  have  been 
favored  with  the  offices  have  resigned  and  proved  false  to  the  hand 
which  had  pampered  them,  not  one  common  soldier  or  common 
sailor  is  known  to  have  deserted  his  flag."3 

David  E.  Twiggs,  a  Brevet  Major-General,  on  February  18, 
1861,  surrendered,  at  San  Antonio,  Texas,  all  the  military 
posts  and  other  property  in  his  possession ;  and  this  after  re 
ceiving  an  order  relieving  him  from  the  command.  He  was  an 
old  and  tried  soldier  of  the  United  States  Army,  and  his 
example  was  pernicious  in  a  high  degree. 

There  were  few,  however,  who,  like  him,  took  the  opportu 
nity  to  desert  and  at«the  same  time  to  do  a  dishonorable  official 
act  calculated  to  injure  the  government  they  had  served. 

March  5,  1861,  Twiggs  was  given  a  grand  reception  in  New 
Orleans;  salutes  were  fired  in  honor  of  his  recent  treachery.4 
President  Buchanan,  to  his  credit,  through  Secretary  of  War 
Holt,  March  1st,  dismissed  him  from  the  army.5 

1  Hist.  Reg.  U.  S.  A.  (Heitman),  pp.  836-845. 
2Scharfs  Hist.  C.  S.  N.,  p.  14. 

3  President  Lincoln's  Message,  July,  1861. 

4  Am.  Cyclop.,  1861,  p.  431. 

5  This  is  the  only  instance  where  Buchanan  issued  such  an  order,  hence  we 

give  it. 

"  March  i,  1861. 

"By  direction  of  the  President,  etc.,  it  is  ordered  that  Brig-Gen.  David  E. 
Twiggs,  Major-General  by  brevet,  be,  and  is  hereby  dismissed  from  the  army  of 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War      163 

It  is  a  curious  fact  that  this  order  of  dismissal  was  signed  by 
5.  Cooper,  Adjutant-General  of  the  United  States  Army  (a 
native  of  New  Jersey),  who,  six  days  later,  resigned  his  posi 
tion,  hastened  to  Montgomery,  Alabama,  and  there  accepted  a 
like  office  in  the  Confederate  government.  Disloyalty  among 
prominent  army  officers  seemed,  for  a  time,  the  rule.1 

It  was  industriously  circulated,  not  without  its  effect,  that 
General  Winfield  Scott  had  deserted  his  country  and  flag  to 
take  command  of  the  Confederate  Army.  To  his  honor  it 
must  be  said,  however,  that  he  never  faltered,  and  the  evidence 
is  overwhelming  that  he  never  entertained  a  thought  of  joining 
his  State — Virginia.  He  early  foresaw  that  disunion  and  war 
were  coming,  and  not  only  deprecated  them  but  desired  to 
strengthen  the  United  States  Government  and  to  avert  both. 
Only  his  great  age  prevented  his  efficiently  leading  the  Union 
armies. 

George  H.  Thomas,  like  General  Scott,  was  a  native  of  Vir 
ginia.  He  was  also  unjustly  charged  with  having  entertained 
disloyal  notions  and  to  have  contemplated  joining  the  South, 
but  later  both  Scott  and  Thomas  were  bitterly  denounced  by 
secessionists  for  not  going  with  Virginia  into  the  Rebellion. 

Officers  connected  with  the  United  States  Revenue  Service 
stationed  in  Southern  cities  were,  generally,  not  only  disloyal, 
but  property  in  their  custody  was  without  scruple  turned  over 
to  the  Confederate  authorities.  The  revenue  cutters  under 
charge  and  direction  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  were  not 
only  seized,  but  their  commanding  officers  in  many  cases  de 
serted  to  the  Confederacy  and  surrendered  them.  A  notable 
example  is  that  of  Captain  Breshwood,  who  commanded  the 

the  United  States  for  his  treachery  to  the  flag  of  his  country,  in  having  surrendered 
on  the  i8th  of  February,  1861,  on  demand  of  the  authorities  of  Texas,  the  mili 
tary  posts  and  other  property  of  the  United  States  in  his  department  and  under 
his  charge. 

"  J.  HOLT,  Secretary  of  War. 
"  S.  COOPER,  Adjt. -General." 

1  Lieutenant  Frank  C.  Armstrong  (First  Cavalry),  pending  his  resignation,  fought 
at  Bull  Run  (July,  1861)  for  the  Union,  then  went  into  the  Confederacy  and 
became  a  Brigadier-General. 


164  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

revenue  cutter  Robert  McClelland,  stationed  at  New  Orleans. 
When  ordered,  January  29,  1861,  to  proceed  with  her  to  New 
York,  he  refused  to  obey.  This  led  John  A.  Dix,  Secretary 
of  the  Treasury,  to  issue  his  celebrated  and  patriotic  "  Shoot- 
him-on-the-spot  "  order.1  Louisiana  had  not  at  that  time 
seceded,  but  the  cutter,  with  Captain  Breshwood,  went  into 
the  Confederacy.  So  of  all  other  such  vessels  coming  within 
reach  of  the  now  much-elated,  over-confident,  and  highly 
excited  Confederate  authorities. 

Before  the  end  of  February,  1861,  the  "  Pelican  Flag  "  was 
flying  over  the  Custom-House,  Mint,  City  Hall,  and  everywhere 
in  Louisiana.  At  the  New  Orleans  levee  ships  carried  every 
flag  on  earth  except  that  of  the  United  States.  The  only 
officer  of  the  army  there  at  the  time  who  was  faithful  to  his 
country  was  Col.  C.  L.  Kilburn,  of  the  Commissary  Depart 
ment,  and  he  was  preparing  to  escape  North.2 

So  masterful  had  become  the  spirit  of  the  South,  born  of 
the  nature  of  the  institution  of  slavery,  that  many  disinclined 
to  disunion  were  carried  away  with  the  belief  that  it  was  soon 
to  be  an  accomplished  fact,  and  that  those  who  had  favored  it 
would  alone  be  the  heroes,  while  those  who  remained  with  the 
broken  Union  would  be  socially  and  forever  ostracized.  There 
were  also  many,  indeed,  who  seriously  entertained  the  belief 
that  the  North,  made  up  as  it  was  of  merchants,  manufactur 
ers,  farmers,  and  laborers,  and  with  the  education  and  disposi 
tion  to  follow  pursuits  incident  to  money-getting  by  their  own 
personal  efforts,  would  not  be  willing  to  engage  in  war,  and 
thus  destroy  their  prospects.  There  were  also  others  who  re 
garded  Northern  men  as  cowards,  who,  even  if  willing  to  fight, 

1  "TREASURY  DEPARTMENT,  Jan.  29,  1861. 
"  W.  HEMPHILL  JONES,  NEW  ORLEANS  : 

"Tell  Lieutenant  Caldwell  to  arrest  Captain  Breshwood,  assume  command  of 
the  cutter  and  obey  the  order  through  you.  If  Captain  Breshwood,  after  arrest, 
undertakes  to  interfere  with  the  command  of  the  cutter,  tell  Lieutenant  Caldwell 
to  consider  him  as  a  mutineer,  and  treat  him  accordingly. 

"  If  any  one  attempts  to  haul  down  the  American  flag,  Shoot  him  on  the  Spot. 

"  JOHN  A.  Dix,  Secretary  of  the  Treasury." 
2  Sherman's  Memoirs,  vol.  i.,  p.  163. 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War     165 

would  not  at  best  be  equal,  a  half  dozen  of  them,  to  one 
Southern  man.  These  false  notions  were  sincerely  entertained. 
The  Southern  people  regarded  slavery  as  ennobling  to  the 
white  race,  and  free  white  labor  as  degrading  to  the  people  of 
the  free  States,  and  hence  were  confident  of  their  own  superior 
ity  in  arms  and  otherwise.  There  were  even  some  people 
North  who  had  so  long  heard  the  Southern  boasts  of  superior 
courage  that  they  half  believed  in  it  themselves,  until  the 
summons  to  arms  dispelled  all  such  illusions. 

To  the  half  credit  of  most  of  the  officers  of  the  United 
States  army,  and  many  of  the  navy,  it  may  be  said  that  when 
they  determined  to  desert  their  country  and  flag  they  resigned 
their  commissions,  or  at  least  tendered  them,  so  they  might 
go  into  rebellion  with  some  color  of  excuse. 

The  War  Department  was  generally,  even  under  Lincoln's 
administration,  gracious  enough  in  most  cases  to  accept  such 
resignations,  even  when  it  knew  or  suspected  the  purpose  for 
which  they  were  tendered.  Lieut.  Julius  A.  De  Lagnel,  of 
the  artillery,  a  Virginian,  who  remained  long  enough  in  the 
Union  to  be  surrendered  to  Secession  authorities  (not  discredit 
able  to  himself)  at  Fayetteville,  North  Carolina,  with  the 
North  Carolina  arsenal  (April  22,  1861),  informed  the  writer 
since  the  war  that,  on  sending  his  resignation  to  the  War  De 
partment,  he  followed  it  to  the  Adjutant-General's  office, 
taking  with  him  some  bags  of  coin  he  had  in  the  capacity  of 
disbursing  officer,  for  the  purpose  of  making  a  settlement. 
He  found  Adjutant-General  Lorenzo  Thomas  not  in  good 
humor,  and  when  requested  to  direct  him  to  a  proper  officer 
to  settle  his  accounts,  Thomas  flew  at  him  furiously,  ordered 
him  to  drop  his  coin-bags,  and  decamp  from  his  presence  and 
from  the  Department,  which  he  did  accordingly.  His  ac 
counts  were  thus  summarily  settled.  (We  shall  soon  hear  of 
De  Lagnel  again.) 

Captain  James  Longstreet,  of  Georgia,  who  became  a  Lieu 
tenant-General  in  the  C.S.A.,  and  one  of  the  ablest  fighting 
generals  in  either  army,  draws  a  rather  refined  distinction  as 
to  the  right  of  an  officer  to  resign  his  commission  and  turn 


1 66  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

enemy  to  his  country,  while  denying  the  right  of  a  non 
commissioned  officer  or  private  soldier  to  quit  the  army  in 
time  of  rebellion  to  follow  his  State. 

Longstreet  was  stationed  at  Albuquerque,  New  Mexico, 
when  Sumter  was  fired  on.  On  receiving  the  news  of  its  cap 
ture  he  resigned  and  went  South,  through  Texas,  to  join  his 
State,  or  rather,  as  it  proved,  to  join  the  Confederate  States 
Army. 

He  says  his  mind  was  relieved  by  information  that  his  resig 
nation  was  accepted,  to  take  effect  June  1st.  He  tells  us  a 
sergeant  from  Virginia  and  other  soldiers  wished  to  accompany 
him,  but  he  would  not  entertain  their  proposition  ;  he  explained 
to  them  that  they  could  not  go  without  authority  of  the  War 
Department,  but  it  was  different  with  commissioned  officers; 
they  could  resign,  and  when  their  resignations  were  accepted 
could  do  as  they  pleased,  while  the  sergeant  and  his  com 
rades  were  bound  by  their  oaths  to  the  term  of  their  enlist 
ment.1 

It  might  be  hard  to  construct  a  more  satisfactory  constitu 
tional  or  moral  theory  than  this  for  persons  situated  as  were 
Captain  Longstreet  and  others,  disposed  as  they  were  to  de 
sert  country  and  comrades  for  the  newly  formed  slave  Confed 
eracy ;  yet  if  the  secession  of  the  native  State  of  an  officer  is 
sufficient  to  dissolve  allegiance  he  has  sworn  to  maintain,  it 
requires  a  delicate  discrimination  to  see  why  the  common 
soldier  might  not  also  be  absolved  from  his  term  contract  and 
oath  for  the  same  reasons. 

There  is  a  point  of  honor  as  old  as  organized  warfare,  that 
in  the  presence  of  danger  or  threatened  danger  it  is  an  act  of 
cowardice  for  an  officer  to  resign  for  any  but  a  good  physical 
cause. 

The  better  way  is  to  justify,  or  if  that  cannot  be  done,  to 
excuse  as  far  as  possible,  the  desertion  of  the  Union  by  army 
and  navy  officers  on  the  ground  that  the  times  were  revolution 
ary,  when  precedents  could  not  be  followed,  and  legal  and 
moral  rights  were  generally  disregarded.  Such  periods  come 

1  Manassas  to  Appomattox  (Longstreet),  pp.  29-30. 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War     167 

occasionally   in   the   history   of  nations.      They   are  properly 
called  rebellions,  when  they  fail. 

"  Rebellion,  indeed,  appears  on  the  back  of  a  flying  enemy,  but 
revolution  flames  on  the  breastplate  of  the  victorious  warriors." 

Robert  E.  Lee,  born  in  Virginia,  of  Revolutionary  stock, 
had  won  reputation  as  a  soldier  in  the  Mexican  War.  He  was 
fifty-four  years  of  age,  a  Colonel  of  the  First  Cavalry,  and, 
though  in  Washington,  was  but  recently  under  orders  from  the 
Department  of  Texas.  There  is  convincing  evidence  that 
General  Scott  and  Hon.  Frank  P.  Blair  tendered  him  the  com 
mand  of  the  army  of  the  United  States  in  the  impending  war. 
This  is  supposed  to  have  caused  him  to  hesitate  as  to  his 
course.  In  a  letter  (April  20,  1861)  to  a  sister  he  deplores  the 
"  state  of  revolution  into  which  Virginia,  after  a  long  struggle, 
has  been  drawn,"  saying: 

"  I  recognize  no  necessity  for  this  state  of  things,  .  .  .  yet  in  my 
own  person  I  had  to  meet  the  question  whether  I  would  take  part 
against  my  native  State.  With  all  my  devotion  to  the  Union,  and 
the  feeling  of  loyalty  and  duty  of  an  American  citizen,  I  have  not 
been  able  to  make  up  my  mind  to  raise  my  hand  against  my  rela 
tives,  my  children,  my  home.  I  have,  therefore,  resigned  my  com 
mission  in  the  army,  and,  save  in  defence  of  my  native  State,  with  the 
hope  that  my  poor  services  will  never  be  needed,  I  hope  I  may 
never  be  called  on  to  draw  my  sword." 

On  the  same  day,  in  a  letter  to  General  Scott  accompanying 
his  resignation,  he  says:  "  Save  in  defence  of  my  State,  I 
never  desire  to  draw  my  sword." 

Lee  registered  himself,  March  5,  1861,  in  the  Adjutant- 
General's  office  as  Brevet-Colonel  and  Lieutenant-Colonel 
Second  Cavalry.2  He  was  nominated,  March  21,  1861,  by 

1  John  Wilkes,  British  Par.,  1780  (Pat.  Reader,  p.  135). 

2  In  1861  an  army  officer  was  not  required  (as  now)  to  take  an  oath  of  office 
on  receiving  promotion.     The  following  is  a  copy  of  the  last  oath  taken  by  Robert 
E.  Lee  as  a  United  States  Army  officer,  and  it  shows  the  form  of  oath  then  taken 
by  other  army  officers. 

"I,  Robert  E.  Lee,  appointed  Lieutenant-Colonel  of  the  Second  Regiment  of 


1 68  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

President  Lincoln,  Colonel  First  Cavalry,  and  on  March  23d  the 
nomination  was  confirmed  by  the  Senate.  He  was  then  com 
missioned  by  the  President,  Colonel,  March  25th,  to  rank  from 
March  16,  1861 ;  he  received  this  commission  March  28th,  and 
accepted  it  by  letter  March  30,  1861.  Seven  States  had  then 
seceded  from  the  Union,  and  the  Confederate  States  of  America 
had  existed  since  February  8,  1861. 

Three  weeks  after  (April  2Oth)  Lee  accepted  this  last  commis 
sion  he  tendered  his  resignation  in  the  United  States  Army. 
It  did  not  reach  the  Secretary  of  War  until  April  24th,  nor  was 
it  accepted  until  April  2/th,  to  take  effect  April  25,  1861.' 

Lee,  however,  accepted,  April  22d,  a  commission  as  Major- 
General  in  the  "  Military  and  Naval  Forces  of  Virginia,"  as 
suming  command  of  them  by  direction  of  Governor  John 
Letcher,  April  23,  1861. 

It  thus  appears  that  two  months  and  a  half  after  the  Confed 
erate  States  were  formed  Robert  E.  Lee  accepted  President 
Lincoln's  commission  in  the  U.S.A.  ;  then  twenty-four  days 
later,  and  pending  the  acceptance  of  his  resignation,  took 
command  of  forces  hostile  to  the  Federal  Union.  He,  April 
24th,  gave  instructions  to  a  subordinate:  "  Let  it  be  known 
that  you  intend  no  attack;  but  invasion  of  our  soil  will  be 
considered  an  act  of  war." 

He  did  not  have  Longstreet's  consolation  of  knowing  his 
resignation  had  been  accepted  before  he  abandoned  his  rank 
and  duties  in  the  United  States  Army;  nor  had  his  State  yet 

Cavalry  in  the  Army  of  the  United  States,  do  solemnly  swear  that  I  will  bear  true 
allegiance  to  the  United  States  of  America,  and  that  I  will  serve  them  honestly 
and  faithfully  against  all  their  enemies  or  opposers  whatsoever  ;  and  observe  and 
obey  the  orders  of  the  President  of  the  United  States,  and  the  orders  of  the  offi 
cers  appointed  over  me,  according  to  the  Rules  and  Articles  for  the  government 
of  the  Armies  of  the  United  States. 

"  R.  E.  LEE,  Bt.-Col.  U.  S.  A. 

"Sworn  to  and  subscribed  before  me  at  West  Point,  N.  Y.,  this  i$th  day  of 
March,  1855. 

"  WM.  H.  CARPENTER,  Justice  of  the  Peace." 

1  Letter  of  Adjutant-General  Thomas  to  Garfield.  Army  of  Cumberland  Society 
Proceedings  (Cleveland),  1870,  p.  94. 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War     169 

seceded  from  the  Union.  Virginia  did  not  enter  into  any  re 
lations  with  the  Confederacy  until  April  25,  1861,  and  then 
only  conditionally.  Her  convention  passed  an  Ordinance  of 
Secession  April  i/th,  to  take  effect,  if  ratified  by  the  votes  of 
her  people,  at  an  election  to  be  held  May  23,  1861.  An  elec 
tion  held  in  Virginia  the  previous  February  resulted  in  choos 
ing  to  a  convention  a  very  large  majority  of  delegates  opposed 
to  secession.  The  convention,  March  i/th — 90  to  45 — rejected 
an  Ordinance  of  Secession.  Virginia's  people  were,  until 
coerced  by  her  disloyal  State  Governor,  faithful  to  the  Union 
of  Washington.  The  fact  remains  that  Lee,  before  his  State 
voted  to  secede,  accepted  a  commission  in  the  army  of  the 
Confederacy,  and  took  an  oath  to  support  its  laws  and  Consti 
tution,  and  thenceforth  drew  his  sword  to  overthrow  the  Union 
of  his  fathers  and  to  establish  a  new  would-be  nation  under 
another  flag.  His  son,  G.  W.  Custis  Lee,  did  not  resign  from 
the  U.S.A.  until  May  2,  1861.  Fitzhugh  Lee  also  accepted 
a  commission  from  Lincoln,  and  resigned  (May  21,  1861)  after 
his  illustrious  uncle. 

It  is  hard  to  understand  how  fundamental  principles  in  gov 
ernment  and  individual  patriotism  and  duty  may  be  made,  on 
moral  or  political  grounds,  to  depend  on  the  conduct  of  the 
temporary  authorities  of  a  State,  or  even  on  the  vote  of  its 
people. 

The  action  of  Robert  E.  Lee  in  leaving  the  United  States 
Army,  and  his  reasons  therefor,  serve  to  show  how  and  why 
many  other  army  and  navy  officers  abandoned  their  country's 
service.  The  Confederacy  promptly  recognized  these  "seced 
ing  officers"  and  for  the  most  part  gave  them,  early,  high 
rank,  and  otherwise  welcomed  them  with  enthusiasm. 

It  is  probable  that  the  slowness  of  promotion  in  time  of 
peace,  in  both  the  army  and  navy  of  the  United  States,  caused 
many  officers  to  resign  and  seek,  with  increased  rank,  new 
fortunes  and  renown  in  war. 

It  is  not  to  be  denied  that  the  custom  of  hospitably  treating 
officers  while  serving  in  the  South,  and  otherwise  socially 
recognizing  them  and  their  families,  had  won  many  to  love 


1 70  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

the  Southern  people  and  their  gallant  ways.  This,  at  least, 
held  the  most  of  the  Southern-born  officers  to  their  own  States, 
though  in  some  cases,  and  perhaps  in  many,  they  did  not  be 
lieve  in  slavery. 

It  may  be  said  also  that  the  generally  cold  business  character 
of  the  well-to-do  Northern  people,  and  their  social  indifference 
to  one  another,  and  especially  to  officers  and  their  families 
serving  at  posts  and  in  cities,  did  not  attach  them  to  the 
North.  An  officer  in  the  regular  service  in  time  of  peace, 
having  no  hope  of  high  promotion  before  he  reaches  old  age, 
has  but  little,  save  social  recognition  of  himself  and  family,  to 
make  him  contented  and  happy.  This  somewhat  helpless 
condition  makes  him  grateful  for  attentions  shown,  and  jealous 
of  inattention. 

Turning  more  directly  to  the  military  situation  on  Lincoln's 
inauguration,  we  find  Major  Anderson  holding  Sumter,  but 
practically  in  a  state  of  siege,  the  Confederate  authorities 
having  assembled  a  large  army  at  Charleston  under  Beaure- 
gard.  Fort  Moultrie  and  Castle  Pinckney  had  been  seized  and 
manned ;  heavy  ordnance  had  been  placed  in  them,  and  bat 
teries  had  been  established  commanding  Fort  Sumter. 

Finally,  on  April  7th,  Anderson  was  forbidden  to  purchase 
fresh  provisions  for  his  little  band.  On  April  loth,  Captain 
G.  V.  Fox,  an  ex-officer  of  the  navy,  sailed  with  a  relief  ex 
pedition,  consisting  of  four  war-ships,  three  steam-tugs,  and  a 
merchant  steamer,  having  on  board  two  hundred  men  and  the 
necessary  supplies  of  ammunition  and  provisions. 

Beauregard  and  the  Confederate  authorities  hearing 
promptly  of  Captain  Fox's  expedition  and  destination,  on 
April  nth,  formally  demanded  of  Major  Anderson  the  evac 
uation  of  Fort  Sumter,  which  demand  was  refused. 

At  4.30  o'clock,  April  I2th,  a  signal  shell  was  fired  at  Fort 
Sumter  from  a  mortar  battery  on  James  Island,  and,  immedi 
ately  after,  hostile  guns  were  opened  from  batteries  on  Morris 
Island,  Sullivan's  Island,  and  Fort  Moultrie,  which  were 
responded  to  from  Fort  Sumter. 

This    signal    shell   opened    actual    war;    its   discharge  was, 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War     171 

figuratively  speaking,  heard  around  the  world  ;  it  awakened  a 
lethargic  people  in  the  Northern  States  of  the  Union  ;  it  caused 
many  who  had  never  dreamed  of  war  to  prepare  for  it ;  it  set 
on  fire  the  blood  of  a  people,  North  and  South,  of  the  same 
race,  not  to  cool  down  until  a  half-million  of  men  had  been 
consumed  in  the  fierce  heat  of  battle;  it  was  the  opening  shot 
intended  to  vindicate  and  establish  human  slavery  as  the  essen 
tial  pillar  of  a  new-born  nation,  the  first  and  only  one  on  earth 
formed  solely  to  eternally  perpetuate  human  bondage  as  a 
social  and  fundamental  political  institution;  but,  in  reality, 
this  shot  was  also  a  signal  to  summon  the  friends  of  human 
freedom  to  arms,  and  to  a  battle  never  to  end  until  slavery 
under  the  Constitution  of  the  restored  Union  should  cease  to 
exist. 

Captain  Fox's  expedition  was  not  organized  as  he  had 
planned  it,  and  though  it  reached  its  destination  off  Sumter 
an  hour  before  the  latter  was  fired  on,  it  could  not,  for  want 
of  light  boats  or  tugs,  send  to  the  fort  the  needed  supplies  or 
men.  Major  Anderson,  after  two  days'  bombardment,  was 
therefore  forced  to  agree  to  evacuate  the  fort,  which  he  ac 
cordingly  did  on  Sunday  afternoon,  April  I4th,  after  having 
saluted  the  flag  as  it  was  lowered.1 

There  were  men  North  as  well  as  South  who  censured  Presi 
dent  Lincoln  and  his  advisers  for  not,  as  was  at  one  time  con 
templated,  peacefully  evacuating  Fort  Sumter,  thus  removing 
the  immediate  cause  for  bringing  on  hostilities,  and  leaving 
still  more  time  for  compromise  talk  and  Northern  concessions. 
But  the  Union  was  already  dissolved  so  far  as  the  seceding 
States  were  able  to  do  it,  and  a  peaceable  restoration  of  those 
States  to  loyalty  and  duty  was  then  plainly  impossible. 

South  Carolina  was  the  first  to  secede,  and  it  is  more  than 
probable  that  President  Lincoln  clearly  discerned  that  the 
overt  act  of  assailing  the  Union  by  war  would  take  place  at 

1  War  Records,  vol.  i.,  pp.  11-13. 

It  is  worthy  of  note  that  at  high  noon,  exactly  four  years  later  (1865),  the  iden 
tical  flag  lowered  in  dishonor  was  "raised  in  glory"  over  Fort  Sumter,  Robert 
Anderson  participating. 


i;2  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

Charleston.  So  long  as  surrenders  of  public  property  went  on 
without  resistance,  the  Confederacy  was  growing  stronger  and 
more  defiant,  and  in  time  foreign  recognition  might  come.  It 
was  much  better  for  the  Union  cause  for  the  first  shot  to  be 
fired  by  Confederate  forces  in  taking  United  States  public 
property  than  by  United  States  forces  in  retaking  it  after  it 
had  been  lost. 

The  people  North  had  wavered,  not  in  their  loyalty  to  the 
Union,  but  in  their  judgment  as  to  how  to  preserve  it,  or 
whether  it  could  be  preserved  at  all,  until  Sumter  came,  then 
firmness  of  conviction  took  immediate  possession  of  them,  and 
life  and  treasure  were  alike  thenceforward  devoted  to  the 
maintenance  of  Federal  authority.  Of  course,  thtre  was  a 
troublesome  minority  North,  who,  either  through  political 
perversity,  cowardice,  or  disloyalty,  never  did  support  the 
war,  at  least  willingly.  It  was  noticeable,  however,  that 
many  of  these  were,  through  former  residence  or  family  rela 
tionship,  imbued  with  pro-slavery  notions  and  prejudice  against 
the  negro. 

It  should  be  said,  also,  that  there  were  many  in  the  North, 
born  in  slave  States,  who  were  the  most  pronounced  against 
slavery.  And  there  were  those  also,  even  in  New  England, 
who  had  never  had  an  opportunity  of  being  tainted  with 
slavery,  who  opposed  the  coercion  of  the  seceding  States,  and 
who  would  rather  have  seen  the  Union  destroyed  than  saved 
by  war.  Again,  long  contact  and  co-operation  of  certain  per 
sons  North  with  Southern  slave-holders  politically,  and  bitter 
opposition  to  President  Lincoln  and  his  party,  made  many 
reluctant  to  affiliate  with  the  Union  war-party.  Some  were 
too  weak  to  rise  above  their  prejudices,  personal  and  political. 
Some  were  afraid  to  go  to  battle.  There  was  also,  though 
strangely  inconsistent,  a  very  considerable  class  of  the  early 
Abolitionists  of  the  Garrison-Smith-Phillips  school  who  did 
not  support  the  war  for  the  Union,  but  who  preferred  the 
slave-holding  States  should  secede,  and  thus  perpetuate  the  in 
stitution  of  slavery  in  America — the  very  thing,  on  moral 
grounds,  such  Abolitionists  had  always  professed  a  desire  to 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War     173 

prevent.  They  opposed  the  preservation  of  the  Union  by 
coercion.  They  thus  laid  themselves  open  to  the  charge  that 
they  were  only  opposed  to  slavery  in  the  Union,  leaving  it  to 
flourish  wherever  it  might  outside  of  the  Union.  This  posi 
tion  was  not  only  inconsistent,  but  unpatriotic.  The  persons 
holding  these  views  gave  little  or  no  moral  or  other  support 
to  the  war  for  the  preservation  of  the  integrity  of  the  Republic. 

There  were  many  loyal  men  in  the  South,  especially  in  sec 
tions  where  slavery  did  not  dominate.  In  the  mountain  regions 
of  the  South,  opposition  to  secession  was  the  rule,  notably  in 
Western  Virginia,  Eastern  Kentucky,  Eastern  Tennessee,  and 
Western  North  Carolina.  There  were  also  loyal  men  in 
Northern  Alabama  and  Georgia.  But  wherever  the  deter 
mined  spirit  of  the  slave-holding  disunionists  controlled,  as  in 
the  cities  and  more  densely  populated  parts  of  the  South, 
though  the  slave-holding  population  was  even  there  in  the 
minority,  the  whole  community  was  forced  to  array  themselves 
with  the  Confederates.  There  were  many  South  who,  at  first, 
determined  to  oppose  disunion,  but  who  succumbed  to  the 
pressure,  under  the  belief  that  the  Confederacy  was  an  accom 
plished  fact,  or  that  the  North  either  would  not  or  could  not 
fight  successfully,  and  would  be  beaten  in  battle.  Boasts  of 
superiority  and  the  great  display  and  noisy  preparation  for  war 
were  misleading  to  those  who  only  witnessed  one  side  of  the 
pending  conflict.  The  North  had,  up  to  Sumter,  been  slow 
to  act,  and  this  was  not  reassuring  to  the  friends  of  the  Union 
South,  or,  perhaps,  anywhere.  The  proneness  of  mankind  to 
be  on  the  successful  side  has  shown  itself  in  all  trying  times. 
It  is  only  the  virtue  of  individual  obstinacy  that  enables  the 
few  to  go  against  an  unjust  popular  clamor. 

But  political  party  ties  North  were  the  hardest  to  break. 
Those  who  had  been  led  to  political  success  generally  by  the 
pro-slavery  politicians  of  the  South  could  not  easily  be  per 
suaded  that  coercion  did  not  mean,  in  some  way,  opposition 
to  themselves  and  their  past  party  principles.  Though  patriot 
ism  was  the  rule  with  persons  of  all  parties  North,  there  were 
yet  many  who  professed  that  true  loyalty  lay  along  lines  other 


1 74  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

than  the  preservation  of  the  Union  by  war.  These  even,  after 
Sumter  fell,  pretended  to,  and  possibly  did,  believe  what  the 
South  repudiated,  to  wit :  that  by  the  siren  song  of  peace  it 
could  be  wooed  back  to  loyalty  under  the  Constitution.  There 
were,  of  course,  those  in  the  North  who  honestly  held  that  the 
Abolitionists  by  their  opposition  to  slavery  and  its  extension 
into  the  Territories  had  brought  on  secession,  and  that  such 
opposition  justified  it.  This  number,  however,  was  at  first 
not  large,  and  as  the  war  progressed  it  grew  less  and  less.  It 
should  be  remembered  that  coercion  of  armed  secession  was 
not  undertaken  to  abolish  slavery  or  to  alter  its  status  in  the 
slave  States.  The  statement,  however,  that  the  destruction  of 
slavery  was  the  purpose  and  end  in  view  was  persistently  put 
forth  as  the  justifying  cause  for  dissolving  the  Union  of  the 
States.  The  cry  that  the  war  on  the  part  of  the  North  was 
"  an  abolition  war,"  that  it  was  for  "  negro  equality,"  had  its 
effect  on  the  more  ignorant  class  of  free  laborers  in  both  sec 
tions.  There  is  an  inherent  feeling  of  or  desire  for  superiority 
in  all  races,  and  this  weakness,  if  it  is  such,  is  exceedingly 
sensitive  to  the  touch  of  the  demagogue. 

There  were  those  high  in  authority  in  the  Confederate  coun 
cils  who  were  not  entirely  deluded  by  the  apparent  indifference 
and  supineness  of  the  Northern  people.  When  Davis  and  his 
Cabinet  held  a  conference  (April  Qth)  to  consider  the  propriety 
of  firing  on  Fort  Sumter,  there  was  not  entire  unanimity  on 
the  question.  Robert  Toombs,  Secretary  of  State,  is  reported 
to  have  said : 

"  The  firing  on  that  fort  will  inaugurate  a  civil  war  greater  than 
any  the  world  has  yet  seen  ;  and  I  do  not  feel  competent  to  advise 
you."  1 

And  later  in  the  conference  Toombs,  in  opposing  the  attack 
on  Sumter,  said : 

"  Mr.  President,  at  this  time  it  is  suicide,  murder,  and  will  lose  us 
every  friend  at  the  North.  You  will  wantonly  strike  a  hornet's 

1  Crawford,  p.  421. 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War     175 

nest  which  extends  from  mountain  to  ocean,  and  legions  now  quiet 
will  swarm  out  and  sting  us  to  death.  It  is  unnecessary  ;  it  puts  us 
in  the  wrong  ;  it  is  fatal."  ] 

The  taking  of  Fort  Sumter  was  the  signal  for  unrestrained 
exultation  on  the  part  of  the  Secessionists.  They  for  a  time 
gave  themselves  up  to  the  wildest  demonstrations  of  joy.  The 
South  now  generally  looked  upon  the  Confederacy  as  already 
established.  The  Confederate  flag  floated  over  Sumter  in 
place  of  the  Stars  and  Stripes.  At  the  Catholic  cathedral  in 
Charleston  a  Te  Deum  was  celebrated  with  great  pomp,  and 
the  Episcopal  bishop  there  attributed  the  event  to  the  "  in 
finite  mercy  of  God,  who  specially  interposed  His  hand  in 
behalf  of  their  righteous  cause." 

The  taking  of  Sumter  was  undoubtedly  the  most  significant 
event  of  the  age.  The  achievement  was  bloodless;  not  a 
man  was  killed  or  a  drop  of  blood  spilled  by  a  hostile  shot,  yet 
it  inaugurated  a  war  that  freed  four  millions  of  God's  people.3 

Montgomery,  the  temporary  Capital  of  the  Confederacy, 
wildly  celebrated  the  event  as  the  first  triumph. 

Bloodless  was  Sumter;  but  the  war  it  opened  was  soon  to 
swallow  up  men  by  the  thousand. 

Fort  Pickens,  in  Pensacola  Harbor,  now  only  remained  in 
possession  of  the  United  States  of  all  the  forts  or  strongholds 
in  the  seceded  South. 

This  fortification  was  taken  possession  of  by  Lieut.  A.  J. 
Slemmer  of  the  United  States  Army,  and  though  in  great  dan 
ger  of  being  attacked  and  taken,  it  was  successfully  reinforced 
on  April  23,  1861,  and  never  fell  into  Confederate  hands.  At 
a  special  session  of  the  Confederate  Congress  at  Montgomery 
(May  21,  1861),  Richmond,  Virginia,  was  made  the  Capital  of 
the  Confederacy,  and  the  Congress  adjourned  to  meet  there. 

Howell  Cobb  (late  Buchanan's  Secretary  of  the  Treasury), 
the  President  of  this  Congress,  with  some  of  the  truth  of 
prophecy  defiantly  said : 

1  Life  of  Toombs  (Stovall),  p.  226. 

1  One  man  was  killed  on  each  side  by  accident. 


1 76  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

"  We  have  made  all  the  necessary  arrangements  to  meet  the 
present  crisis.  Last  night  we  adjourned  to  meet  in  Richmond  on 
the  2oth  of  July.  I  will  tell  you  why  we  did  this.  The  'Old 
Dominion/  as  you  know,  has  at  last  shaken  off  the  bonds  of  Lin 
coln,  and  joined  her  noble  Southern  sisters.  Her  soil  is  to  be  the 
battle-ground,  and  her  streams  are  to  be  dyed  with  Southern  blood. 
We  felt  that  her  cause  was  our  cause,  and  that  if  she  fell  we  wanted 
to  die  by  her." 


How  was  the  news  of  the  failure  to  reinforce  Sumter,  and 
of  its  being  fired  on  and  taken  possession  of  by  a  rebellious 
people,  received  in  the  North  ?  The  evacuation  of  Fort  Sum 
ter  was  known  in  Washington  and  throughout  the  country 
almost  as  soon  as  at  Charleston.  Hostilities  could  no  longer 
be  averted,  save  by  the  ignominious  surrender  of  all  the  blood- 
bought  rights  of  the  founders  of  the  Republic. 

It  must  not  be  assumed  that  the  President  of  the  United 
States  had  not  already  calculated  on  the  probabilities  of  war. 
The  portentous  clouds  had  been  long  gathering,  and  the  cer 
tain  signs  of  the  impending  battle-storm  had  been  discerned 
by  Lincoln  and  his  advisers.  He  had  prepared,  as  best  he 
could  under  the  circumstances,  to  meet  it.  The  long  suspense 
was  now  broken.  This  was  some  relief.  There  were  to  be  no 
more  temporizing,  no  more  compromises,  no  more  offers  of 
concession  to  slavery  or  to  disunionists.  The  doctrine  of  the 
assumed  right  of  a  State,  at  will,  and  for  any  real  or  pretended 
grievance,  to  secede  from  and  to  dissolve  its  relation  with  the 
Union  of  the  States,  and  to  absolve  itself  from  all  its  constitu 
tional  relations  and  obligations,  was  now  about  to  be  tried 
before  a  tribunal  that  would  execute  its  inexorable  decrees 
with  a  power  from  which  there  is  no  appeal.  Mercy  is  not  an 
attribute  of  war,  either  in  its  methods  or  decisions.  The  latter 
must  stand  in  the  end  as  against  the  conquered.  From  war 
there  is  no  appeal  but  to  war.  Time  and  enlightenment  may 
modify  or  alter  the  mandates  of  war,  but  in  this  age  of  civiliza 
tion  and  knowledge,  neither  nations  nor  peoples  move  back 
ward.  Ground  gained  for  freedom  or  humanity,  in  politics, 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War     177 

science,  literature,  or  religion,  is  held,  and  from  this  fresh  ad 
vances  may  be  made.  Needless  cruelty  may  be  averted  in  the 
conduct  of  war,  but  mercy  is  not  an  element  in  the  science  of 
destroying  life  and  shedding  blood  on  the  battle-field. 

Sunday,  April  I4th  (though  bearing  date  the  I5th),  the  same 
day  Sumter  was  evacuated,  President  Lincoln  issued  his  proc 
lamation,  reciting  that  the  laws  of  the  United  States  had 
been  and  then  were  opposed  and  their  execution  obstructed  in 
the  States  of  South  Carolina,  Georgia,  Alabama,  Florida, 
Mississippi,  Louisiana,  and  Texas,  by  combinations  too  power 
ful  to  be  suppressed  by  ordinary  judicial  proceedings,  or  by 
powers  vested  in  the  marshals  by  law;  he  called  for  seventy- 
five  thousand  of  the  militia  of  the  several  States  of  the  Union ; 
appealed  to  all  loyal  citizens  to  maintain  the  honor,  integrity, 
and  existence  of  the  National  Union,  and  "  the  perpetuity  of 
popular  government,  and  to  redress  wrongs  already  long 
enough  endured."  '  The  first  service,"  the  proclamation 
recites,  "  assigned  to  the  forces  called  forth  will  probably  be 
to  repossess  the  forts,  places,  and  property  which  have  been 
seized  trom  the  Union." 

It  commanded  the  persons  composing  the  combinations  re 
ferred  to,  "  to  disperse  and  retire  peaceably  to  their  respective 
abodes  within  twenty  days." 

It  called  Congress  to  convene  Thursday,  July  4,  1861,  in 
extraordinary  session,  "  to  consider  and  determine  such  meas 
ures  as,  in  their  wisdom,  the  public  safety  and  interest  rnay 
seem  to  demand." 

This  proclamation  was  the  first  announcement  by  President 
Lincoln  of  a  deliberate  purpose  to  preserve  the  integrity  of  the 
Republic  by  a  resort  to  arms.  In  his  recent  Inaugural  Ad 
dress  he  had,  almost  pathetically,  pleaded  for  peace — for 
friendship ;  and  there  is  no  doubting  that  his  sincere  desire 
was  to  avoid  bloodshed.  He  then  had  no  thought  of  attacking 
slavery,  but  rather  to  protect  and  grant  it  more  safeguards  in 
the  States  where  it  existed.  Later,  on  many  occasions,  when 
the  war  had  done  much  to  inflame  public  sentiment  in  the 
North  against  the  South,  he  publicly  declared  he  would  save 


VOL.  I. — 12. 


1 78  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

the  "  Union  as  it  was."     His  most  pronounced  utterance  on 
this  point  was : 

"  I  would  save  the  Union.  I  would  save  it  the  shortest  way 
under  the  Constitution.  The  sooner  the  national  authority  can  be 
restored,  the  nearer  the  Union  will  be  'the  Union  as  it  was.'  If 
there  be  those  who  would  not  save  the  Union  unless  they  could  at 
the  same  time  save  slavery,  I  do  not  agree  with  them.  If  there 
be  those  who  would  not  save  the  Union  unless  they  could  at  the 
same  time  destroy  slavery,  I  do  not  agree  with  them.  My  para 
mount  object  in  this  struggle  is  to  save  the  Union,  and  is  not  either 
to  save  or  destroy  slavery.  If  I  could  save  the  Union  without  free 
ing  any  slave,  I  would  do  it  ;  and  if  I  could  save  it  by  freeing  some 
and  leaving  others  alone,  I  would  also  do  that."  1 

But  Abraham  Lincoln  was  not  understood  in  1861,  nor  even 
later  during  the  war,  and  not  fully  during  life,  by  either  his 
enemies  or  his  personal  or  party  friends.  The  South,  in  its 
leadership,  was  implacable  in  the  spirit  of  its  hostility,  but  the 
masses,  even  there,  in  time  came  to  understand  his  true  pur 
poses  and  sincere  character. 

Two  days  after  the  call  for  seventy-five  thousand  troops, 
President  Davis  responded  to  it  by  proclaiming  to  the  South 
that  President  Lincoln  had  announced  the  intention  of  "  in 
vading  the  Confederacy  with  an  armed  force  for  the  purpose 
of  capturing  its  fortresses,  subverting  its  independence,  and 
subjecting  the  free  people  thereof  to  a  foreign  power."  In 
the  same  proclamation  he  invited  persons  to  take  service  in 
private  armed  vessels  on  the  high  seas,  tendering  to  such  per 
sons  as  would  accept  them  commissions  or  letters  of  marque 
and  reprisal. 

At  this  time  a  military  spirit  had  been  aroused  throughout 
the  seceded  States,  and  a  large  number  of  well-equipped 
Southern  troops  were  already  in  the  field,  chiefly  at  Charleston 
and  Pensacola — in  all  (including  about  16,000  on  their  way  to 
Virginia)  about  35,000.  The  field,  staff,  and  general  officers 

1  Letter  to  Greeley,  August  22,  1862,  Lincoln's  Com.  Works,  vol.  ii.,  p.  227 ;  also 
same  sentiment,  letter  to  Robinson,  August  17,  1864,  p.  563. 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War  179 

in  charge  of  these  troops  were  mainly  graduates  of  West  Point 
or  other  military  schools;  even  the  captains  of  companies  were 
many  of  them  educated  in  the  institutions  referred  to.  It  is 
not  to  be  denied  that  a  higher  military  spirit  existed  in  the 
South  than  in  the  North  prior  to  the  war.  The  young  men 
from  plantations  were  more  generally  unemployed  at  active 
labor,  and  hence  had  more  time  to  cultivate  a  martial  spirit 
than  the  hard-working  young  men  North. 

The  summons  to  arms  found  the  North  unprepared  so  far  as 
previous  spirit  and  training  were  concerned;  yet  it  did  not 
hesitate,  and  troops  were,  within  two  days,  organized  and  on 
their  way  from  several  of  the  States  to  the  defence  of  Wash 
ington.  The  6th  Massachusetts  was  fired  upon  by  a  riotous 
mob  in  the  streets  of  Baltimore  on  April  iQth.  On  every  side 
war  levies  and  preparations  for  war  went  forward.  The  farm, 
the  shop,  the  office,  the  counting-room,  the  professions,  the 
schools  and  colleges,  the  skilled  and  the  unskilled  in  all  kinds 
of  occupation,  gave  up  of  their  best  to  fill  the  patriotic  ranks. 
The  wealthy,  the  well-to-do,  and  the  poor  were  found  in  the 
same  companies  and  regiments,  on  a  common  footing  as  sol 
diers,  and  often  men  theretofore  moving  in  the  highest  social 
circles  were  contentedly  commanded  by  those  of  the  humblest 
social  civil  life. 

The  companies  were,  as  a  general  rule,  commanded  by  men 
of  no  previous  military  training,  though  wherever  a  military 
organization  existed  it  was  made  a  nucleus  for  a  volunteer 
company.  Often  indifferent  men,  with  a  little  skill  in  drilling 
soldiers,  and  with  no  other  known  qualification,  were  sought 
out  and  eagerly  commissioned  by  governors  of  States  as  field 
officers,  a  colonelcy  often  being  given  to  such  persons.  A 
volunteer  regiment  was  considered  fortunate  if  it  had  among 
its  field  officers  a  lieutenant  from  the  regular  army,  or  even  a 
person  from  civil  life  who  had  gained  some  little  military 
knowledge. 

General  officers  were  too  often,  from  apparent  necessity, 
taken  from  those  who  had  more  influence  than  military  skill. 
Some  of  these,  however,  by  patient  toil,  coupled  with  zeal  and 


1 80  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

brains,  performed  valuable  service  to  their  country  and  won 
honorable  names  as  soldiers.  But  the  most  of  them  made 
only  moderate  officers  and  fair  reputations.  War  develops 
and  inspires  men,  and  if  it  continues  long,  great  soldiers  are 
evolved  from  its  fierce  conflicts. 

Accidental  good  fortune  in  war  sometimes  renders  weak  and 
unworthy  men  conspicuous.  Accidental  bad  fortune  in  war 
often  overtakes  able,  worthy,  honest,  honorable  men  of  the 
first  promise  and  destroys  them.1  Very  few  succeed  in  a  long 
war  through  pure  military  genius  alone,  if  there  is  such  a 
thing.  Many,  in  the  heat  of  battle-field  experiences  and  in 
campaigns  are  inspired  with  the  common  sense  that  makes  them, 
through  success,  really  great  soldiers.  The  indispensable 
quality  of  personal  bravery,  commonly  supposed  sufficient  to 
make  a  man  a  valuable  officer,  is  often  of  the  smallest  impor 
tance.  A  merely  brave,  rash  man  in  the  ranks  may  be  of  some 
value  as  an  inspiring  example  to  his  immediate  comrades,  but 
he  is  hardly  equal  for  that  purpose  to  the  intelligent  soldier 
who  obeys  orders,  and,  though  never  reckless,  yet,  through  a 
proper  amount  of  individual  pride,  does  his  whole  duty  with 
out  braggadocio. 

A  mere  dashing  officer  is  more  and  more  a  failure,  and  un 
fitted  to  command,  in  proportion  as  he  is  high  in  rank.  Rash 
personal  conduct  which  might  be  tolerated  in  a  lieutenant 
would  in  a  lieutenant-general  be  conclusive  of  his  unfitness  to 
hold  any  general  command.  Of  course,  there  are  rare  emer 
gencies  when  an  officer,  let  his  rank  be  what  it  may,  should 
lead  in  an  assault  or  forlorn  hope,  or  rush  in  to  stay  a  panic 
among  his  own  troops. 

This,  like  all  other  actions  of  a  good  officer,  must  also  be  an 
inspiration  of  duty.  The  coward  in  war  has  no  place,2  and 

1  General  Benjamin  Lincoln,  of  the  Revolution,  affords  a  striking  example.     He 
was  brave,  skilful,  often  held  high  command,  and  always  possessed  Washington's 
confidence,  yet  he  never  won  a  battle.     To  compensate  him  somewhat  for  his  mis 
fortunes  Washington  designated  him  to  receive  the  surrender  at  Yorktown,  Octo 
ber  19,  1781. — Washington  and  His  Generals  (Headley),  vol.  ii.,  pp.  104,  121. 

2  Euripides  said,  more  than  two  thousand  years  ago  :   "  Cowards  do  not  count 'in 
battle  ;  they  are  there,  but  not  in  it" 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War  181 

when  found  in  an  army  (which  is  rare)  should  be  promptly 
mustered  out.  There  was  no  such  thing  in  the  late  war  as  a 
regiment  of  cowards.  Inefficient  or  timid  officers  may  have 
given  their  commands  a  bad  name,  and  caused  them  to  lose 
confidence  in  success,  and  hence  to  become  unsteady  or  pan 
icky.  The  average  American  is  not  deficient  in  true  courage. 

Careful  drill  and  discipline  make  good  soldiers. 

The  American  people  were  now  awake  to  the  realities  of  a 
war  in  which  the  same  race,  blood,  and  kindred  were  to  con 
tend,  on  one  side  for  a  separate  nationality  and  for  a  form  of 
government  based  on  the  single  idea  of  perpetuating  and  fos 
tering  the  institution  of  domestic  slavery  and  a  so-called  civili 
zation  based  thereon,  and  on  the  other  for  the  preservation  of 
the  integrity  of  the  Union  of  States,  under  one  Constitution 
and  one  flag. 

In  addition  to  the  I5th  of  April  proclamation  for  75,000 
volunteers  for  ninety  days'  service,  the  President  (May  3d) 
called  into  the  United  States  service  42,034  more  volunteers 
to  serve  for  three  years,  unless  sooner  discharged.  He  at  the 
same  time  directed  that  eight  regiments  of  infantry,  one  of 
cavalry,  and  one  of  artillery  should  be  added  to  the  regular 
army,  making  a  maximum  of  22,714  regular  officers  and  en 
listed  men;  he  also  called  for  18,000  seamen  for  the  naval 
service. 

All  these  calls  for  enlistment  were  responded  to  by  the  loyal 
States  with  the  greatest  promptness,  and  the  numbers  called 
for  were  more  than  furnished,  notwithstanding  the  failure  of 
some  of  the  Southern  non-seceding  States  to  promptly  fill 
their  assigned  quotas. 

Governor  Burton  of  Delaware  (April  26th)  issued  a  proc 
lamation  for  the  formation  of  volunteer  companies  to  protect 
lives  and  property  in  the  State,  not  to  be  subject  to  be  ordered 
into  the  United  States  service,  the  Governor,  however,  to  have 
the  option  of  offering  them  to  the  general  government  for  the 
defence  of  the  Capital  and  the  support  of  its  Constitution  and 
laws. 

Governor   Hicks   of   Maryland   (May   I4th)  called   for   four 


1 82  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

regiments  to  serve  within  the  limits  of  the  State,  or  for  the 
defence  of  the  Capital  of  the  United  States. 

Governor  Letcher  of  Virginia  (April  i6th)  spitefully  denied 
the  constitutionality  of  the  call  for  troops  "  to  subjugate  the 
Southern  States." 

Governor  Ellis  of  North  Carolina  (April  I5th)  dispatched 
that  he  regarded  the  levy  of  troops  "  for  the  purpose  of  sub 
jugating  the  States  of  the  South  as  in  violation  of  the  Consti 
tution  and  a  usurpation  of  power." 

Governor  Magoffin  of  Kentucky  (April  i$th)  wired: 

"  Your  dispatch  is  received.  In  answer  I  say  emphatically,  Ken 
tucky  will  furnish  no  troops  for  the  wicked  purpose  of  subduing 
her  sister  Southern  States." 

Governor  Harris  of  Tennessee  (April  i8th)  replied: 

"  Tennessee  will  not  furnish  a  single  man  for  coercion,  but  fifty 
thousand,  if  necessary,  for  the  defence  of  our  rights  or  those  of  our 
Southern  brethren." 

Governor  Jackson  of  Missouri  (April  i/th)  answered: 

"  Your  requisition,  in  my  judgment,  is  illegal,  unconstitutional, 
and  revolutionary  in  its  objects,  inhuman  and  diabolical,  and  can 
not  be  complied  with." 

Governor  Rector  of  Arkansas  (April  22d)  responded : 

"  None  will  be  furnished.  The  demand  is  only  adding  insult  to 
injury."  ] 

Four  of  the  slave-holding  States  thus  responding  to  the  Presi 
dent's  call,  to  wit:  Virginia,  Arkansas,  Tennessee,  and  North 
Carolina,  soon  joined  the  Confederate  States;  Maryland,  Mis 
souri,  Kentucky,  and  Delaware  remained  in  the  Union,  and, 
later,  rilled  their  quotas  under  the  several  calls  for  troops  for 
the  United  States  service,  though  from  each  many  also  enlisted 
in  the  Confederate  Army. 

1  Hist,  of  Rebellion  (McPherson),  pp.  114,  115. 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War  183 

The  Union  volunteers  were  either  hastened,  unprepared  by 
complete  organization  or  drill,  to  Washington,  D.  C.,  to  stand 
in  its  defence  against  an  anticipated  attack  from  Beauregard's 
already  large  organized  army,  or  they  were  assembled  in  drill 
camps,  selected  for  convenience  of  concentration  and  disper 
sion,  to  the  scenes  of  campaigns  soon  to  be  entered  upon. 

Arms  in  the  North  were  neither  of  good  quality  nor  abun 
dant.  Some  were  hastily  bought  abroad — Enfield  rifles  from 
England,  Austrian  rifles  from  Austria;  each  country  furnish 
ing  its  poorest  in  point  of  manufacture.  But  there  were  soon 
in  operation  establishments  in  the  North  where  the  best  of 
guns  then  known  in  warfare  were  made.  The  old  flint-lock 
musket  had  theretofore  been  superseded  by  the  percussion- 
lock  musket,  but  some  of  the  guns  supplied  to  the  troops  were 
old,  and  altered  from  the  flint-lock.  These  muskets  were 
muzzle-loaders,  smooth  bores,  firing  only  buck  and  ball  cart 
ridges — .69  calibre.  They  were  in  process  of  supersession  by 
the  .58  calibre  rifle  for  infantry,  or  the  rifle-carbine  for  cavalry, 
generally  of  a  smaller  calibre.  The  English  Enfield  rifle  was 
of  .58  calibre,  and  the  Springfield  rifle,  which  soon  came  into 
common  use,  was  of  like  calibre.  The  Austrian  rifle  of  .54 
calibre  proved  to  be  of  poor  construction,  and  was  generally 
condemned.1  A  rifle  for  infantry  of  .58  calibre  was  adopted, 
manufactured  and  used  in  the  Confederacy.  The  steel  rifled 
cannon  for  field  artillery  also  came  to  take  the  place,  in  gen 
eral,  of  the  smooth-bore  brass  gun,  though  many  kinds  of  can 
non  of  various  calibres  and  construction  were  in  use  in  both 
armies  throughout  the  war. 

The  general  desire  of  new  volunteers  was  to  be  possessed  of 
an  abundance  of  arms,  such  as  guns,  pistols,  and  knives.  The 

1  Ordnance  and  inspecting  officers  during  the  War  of  the  Rebellion  contended 
that  the  .58  calibre  rifle  was  the  smallest  practicable.  In  1863  I  purchased  for 
special  use  a  small  number  of  Martini-Henry  repeating  rifles,  calibre  .44,  and 
on  applying  for  ammunition,  the  ordnance  officer  protested  against  supplying  it  on 
the  ground  that  the  ball  used  was  too  small  for  effective  use.  This,  I  demonstrated 
at  the  time,  was  a  mistake.  And  now  (1896),  after  years  of  most  careful  experi 
ments  and  tests  by  the  most  skilled  boards  of  officers,  English,  German,  French, 
Austrian,  Swedish,  United  States,  etc.,  it  has  been  ascertained  that  a  steel-jacket, 


1 84  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

two  latter  weapons  were  even  worse  than  useless  for  the  in 
fantry  soldier — mere  incumbrances.  An  officer  even  had  little 
use  for  a  pistol;  only  sometimes  in  a  mele"e.  The  cavalry  re 
sorted,  under  some  officers,  to  the  pistol  instead  of  the  sword. 
In  the  South,  at  the  opening  of  the  war,  shot-guns  and  squirrel 
rifles  were  gathered  together  for  arms,  and  long  files  were 
forged  in  large  quantities  by  common  blacksmiths  into  knives 
or  a  sort  of  cutlass  (or  machete)  for  use  in  battle.1  These  were 
never  used  by  regularly-organized  troops.  Guerrillas,  acting 
in  independent,  small  bands,  were,  however,  often  armed  with 
such  unusual  weapons.  The  North  had  no  such  soldiers. 
The  South  had  many  bands  of  them,  the  leaders  of  which 
gained  much  notoriety,  but  they  contributed  little  towards 
general  results.  Guerrillas  were,  at  best,  irregular  soldiers, 
who  in  general  masqueraded  as  peaceful  citizens,  only  taking 
up  arms  to  make  raids  and  to  attack  small,  exposed  parties, 
trains,  etc.  This  sort  of  warfare  simply  tended  to  irritate  the 
North  and  intensify  hatred  for  the  time. 

Not  in  the  matter  of  arms  alone  was  there  much  to  learn  by 
experience.  McClellan  and  others  had  visited  the  armies  of 
Europe  and  made  reports  thereon ;  Halleck  had  written  on 
\heArtofWar;  General  Scott  and  others  had  practical  ex 
perience  in  active  campaigns;  but  nobody  seemed  to  know 
what  supplies  an  army  required  to  render  it  most  effective  on 
the  march  or  in  battle. 

When  the  volunteers  first  took  the  field  the  transportation 
trains  occupied  on  the  march  more  than  four  times  the  space 
covered  by  the  troops.  Large  details  had,  as  a  consequence, 
to  be  made  to  manage  the  trains  and  drive  the  teams;  large 
detachments,  under  officers,  to  go  with  them  as  guards.  To 
supply  forage  for  the  immense  number  of  horses  and  mules 

leaden  ball  fired  from  a  rifle  of  .30  calibre  has  the  highest  velocity  and  greatest 
penetrating  power. 

The  armies  of  all  these  countries  are  now,  or  are  fast  being,  armed  with  this 
superior,  small-calibre  rifle. 

1  As  late  as  April,  1862,  Jeff.  Davis,  though  a  soldier  by  training  and  experience, 
attached  importance  to  "  pikes  and  knives  "  as  war-weapons. —  War  Records,  vol. 
x.,  pt.  2,  p.  413. 


Sumter  Fired  on  and  Preparations  for  War   185 

was  not  only  a  great  tax  upon  the  roads  but  a  needless  expense 
to  the  government.  Excessive  provision  for  tents  for  head 
quarters  and  officers  as  well  as  the  soldiers  was  also  made. 
Officers  as  well  as  private  soldiers  carried  too  much  worse  than 
useless  personal  clothing,  including  boots  (wholly  worthless  to 
a  footman)  and  other  baggage;  each  officer  as  a  rule  had  one  or 
more  trunks  and  a  mess-chest,  with  other  supplies.  McClellan, 
in  July,  1861,  had  about  fifteen  four-horse  or  six-mule  teams  to 
carry  the  personal  outfit  of  the  General  and  his  staff;  brigade 
headquarters  (there  were  then  no  corps  or  divisions)  had  only 
a  proportionately  smaller  number  of  teams;  and  for  the  field 
and  staff  of  a  regimental  headquarters  not  less  than  six  such 
teams  were  required,  including  one  each  for  the  adjutant  and 
the  regimental  quartermaster  and  commissary  ;  and  the  surgeon 
of  the  regiment  and  his  assistants  required  two  more. 

Each  company  was  assigned  one  team.  A  single  regiment 
— ten  companies — would  seldom  have  less  than  eighteen  large 
teams  to  enable  it  to  move  from  its  camp.  Something  was, 
however,  due  to  the  care  of  new  and  unseasoned  troops,  but 
in  the  light  of  future  experience,  the  extreme  folly  of  thus  try 
ing  to  make  war  seems  ridiculous.  A  great  change,  however, 
occurred  during  the  later  years  of  the  war.  When  I  was  on 
active  campaigns  with  a  brigade  of  seven  regiments,  one  team 
was  allowed  for  brigade  headquarters,  and  one  for  each  regi 
ment.  In  this  arrangement  each  soldier  carried  his  own  half- 
tent  (dog-tent)  rolled  on  his  knapsack,  and  the  quartermaster, 
commissary,  medical,  and  ordinance  supplies  were  carried  in 
general  trains.  This  applied  to  all  the  armies  of  the  Union. 
The  Confederates  had  even  less  transportation  with  moving 
troops. 

But  we  must  not  tarry  longer  with  these  details.  Hence 
forth  we  shall  briefly  try  to  tell  the  story  of  such  of  the  cam 
paigns,  events,  and  scenes  of  the  conflict  as  in  the  ensuing 
four  years  of  war  came  under  our  observation  or  were  con 
nected  with  movements  in  which  we  participated,  interweaving 
some  personal  history. 


CHAPTER  III 

PERSONAL  MENTION — OCCUPANCY  OF  WESTERN  VIRGINIA 
UNDER  McCLELLAN  (l86l) — CAMPAIGN  AND  BATTLE  OF 
RICH  MOUNTAIN,  AND  INCIDENTS 

EVENTS  leading,  as  we  have  seen,  to  the  secession  of 
States;  to  the  organization  of  the  Confederate  States 
of  America;  to  the  assembling  of  Confederate  forces  in 
large  numbers ;  to  the  firing  on  Fort  Sumter  and  its  subsequent 
capitulation,  and  to  the  summons  to  arms  of  seventy-five  thou 
sand  volunteer  United  States  troops,  ended  all  thoughts  of 
peace  through  means  other  than  war. 

President  Lincoln  and  his  advisers  did  not  delude  themselves 
with  the  notion  that  three  months  would  end  the  war.  He 
and  they  knew  too  well  how  deep-seated  the  purpose  was  to 
consummate  secession,  hence  before  the  war  had  progressed 
far  the  first  three  years'  call  was  made. 

By  common  judgment,  South  as  well  as  North,  Virginia  was 
soon  to  be  the  scene  of  early  battles.  Its  proximity  to  Wash 
ington,  the  Capital,  made  it  necessary  to  occupy  the  south  side 
of  the  Potomac.  The  western  part  of  the  State  was  not  largely 
interested  in  slaves  or  slave  labor,  and  it  was  known  to  have 
many  citizens  loyal  to  the  Union.  These  it  was  important  to 
protect  and  recognize.  The  neutral  and  doubtful  attitude 
Kentucky  at  first  assumed  made  its  occupation  a  very  delicate 
matter. 

While  many  volunteer  troops  were  hastened  to  the  defense 
of  Washington,  large  numbers  were  gathered  in  camps  through 
out  the  North  for  instruction,  organization,  and  equipment. 

When  Lincoln's  first  call  for  troops  was  made  I  was  at 

1 86 


Battle  of  Rich  Mountain  187 

Springfield,  Ohio,  enjoying  a  fairly  lucrative  law  practice  as 
things  then  went,  but  with  competition  acutely  sharp  for 
future  great  success. 

I  had,  in  November,  1856,  corne  from  the  common  labor  of 
a  farm  to  a  small  city,  to  there  complete  a  course  of  law  read 
ing,  commenced  years  before  and  prosecuted  at  irregular  inter 
vals.  After  my  removal  to  Springfield  I  finished  a  preparatory 
course,  and  January  12,  1858,  when  not  yet  twenty-two  years 
of  age,  I  was  admitted  to  practice  law  by  the  Supreme  Court 
of  Ohio,  and  settled  in  Springfield,  where  I  had  the  good 
fortune  to  enjoy  a  satisfactory  share  of  the  clientage.  I  had 
from  youth  a  desire  to  learn  as  much  as  possible  of  war  and 
military  campaigns,  but,  save  a  little  volunteer  militia  training 
of  a  poor  kind,  obtained  as  a  member  of  a  uniformed  military 
company,  and  a  little  duty  on  a  militia  general's  staff,  I  had 
no  education  or  preparation  for  the  responsible  duties  of  a 
soldier — certainly  none  for  the  important  duties  of  an  officer  of 
any  considerable  command. 

Thus  situated  and  unprepared,  on  the  first  call  for  volunteers 
I  enlisted  as  a  private  soldier  in  a  Springfield  company,  and 
went  with  it  to  Camp  Jackson,  now  Goodale  Park,  Columbus, 
Ohio.1 

The  first  volunteers  were  allowed  to  elect  their  own  company 
and  field  officers.  I  was  elected  Major  of  the  3d  Ohio  Volun 
teer  Infantry,  and  commissioned,  April  27,  1861,  by  Governor 
William  Dennison. 

A  few  days  subsequently,  my  regiment  was  sent  to  Camp 
Dennison,  near  Cincinnati,  to  begin  its  work  of  preparation 
for  the  field.  Here  I  saw  and  came  to  know  in  some  sense 
Major-General  George  B.  McClellan,  also  Wm.  S.  Rosecrans, 
Jacob  D.  Cox,  Gordon  Granger,  and  others  who  afterward  be 
came  Major-Generals.  I  also  met  many  others,  whom  in  the 
campaigns  and  battles  of  the  succeeding  four  years  I  knew  and 
appreciated  as  accomplished  officers.  But  many  I  met  there 
fell  by  the  way,  not  alone  by  the  accidents  of  battle  but  be 
cause  of  unfitness  for  command  or  general  inefficiency. 

1  For  a  summary  life  of  the  \vriter  before  and  since  the  war,  see  Appendix  A. 


1 88  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

The  Colonel  of  my  regiment  (Marrow)  so  magnified  a  Mexi 
can  war  experience  as  to  make  the  unsophisticated  citizen- 
soldier  look  upon  him  with  awe,  yet  he  never  afterwards 
witnessed  a  real  battle.  John  Beatty,  who  became  later  a 
Colonel,  then  Brigadier-General,  was  my  Lieutenant-Colonel ; 
he  did  not,  I  think,  even  possess  the  equivalent  of  my  poor 
pretense  of  military  training.  He  was,  however,  a  typical 
volunteer  Union  soldier;  brainy,  brave,  terribly  in  earnest, 
always  truthful,  and  what  he  did  not  know  he  made  no  pre 
tense  of  knowing,  but  set  about  learning.  He  had  by  nature 
the  spirit  of  a  good  soldier;  as  the  war  progressed  the  true 
spirit  of  a  warrior  became  an  inspiration  to  him ;  and  at  Perry  - 
ville,  Stone's  River,  Chickamauga,  and  on  other  fields  he  won 
just  renown,  not  alone  for  personal  gallantry  but  for  skill  in 
handling  and  personally  fighting  his  command. 

The  3d  Ohio  and  most  of  the  three-months'  regiments  at 
Camp  Dennison  were  promptly  re-enlisted  under  the  Presi 
dent's  May  3d  call  for  three  years'  volunteers,  and  I  was  again 
(June  12,  1861)  commissioned  its  Major. 

In  early  June,  McClellan,  who  commanded  the  Department 
of  Ohio,  including  Western  Virginia,  crossed  the  Ohio  and  as 
sembled  an  army,  mainly  at  and  in  the  vicinity  of  Grafton. 

He  had  issued,  May  26th,  1861,  from  his  headquarters  at 
Cincinnati,  a  somewhat  bombastic  proclamation  to  the  people 
of  Western  Virginia,  relating  in  part  to  the  recent  vote  on 
secession,  saying  his  invasion  was  delayed  to  avoid  the  appear 
ance  of  influencing  the  result.  It  promised  protection  to  loyal 
men  against  armed  rebels,  and  indignantly  disclaimed  any  dis 
position  to  interfere  with  slaves  or  slavery,  promising  to  crush 
an  attempted  insurrection  "  with  an  iron  hand." 

The  proclamation  closed  thus: 

"  Notwithstanding  all  that  has  been  said  by  the  traitors  to  induce 
you  to  believe  that  our  advent  among  you  will  be  signalized  with 
interference  with  your  slaves,  understand  one  thing  clearly — not 
only  will  we  abstain  from  all  such  interference,  but  we  will,  on  the 
contrary,  with  an  iron  hand,  crush  any  attempt  at  insurrection  on 


BRIGADIER-GEC  ERAL    OF    VOLUNTEEHS. 

(From  a  photograph   taken  /&5j 


Battle  of  Rich  Mountain  189 

their  part.     Now  that  we  are  in  your  midst,  I  call  upon  you  to  fly 
to  arms  and  support  the  General  Government. 

"  Sever  the  connection  that  binds  you  to  traitors.  Proclaim  to 
the  world  that  the  faith  and  loyalty  so  long  boasted  by  the  Old 
Dominion  are  still  preserved  in  Western  Virginia,  and  that  you  re 
main  true  to  the  Stars  and  Stripes."  : 

This  proclamation  won  no  friends  for  the  Union  in  the 
mountains  of  Western  Virginia,  where  slaves  were  few  and 
slavery  was  detested.  The  mountaineers  were  naturally  for 
the  Union,  and  such  an  appeal  was  likely  to  do  more  harm  than 
good. 

The  proclamation,  however,  was  in  harmony  with  the  then 
policy  of  the  Administration  at  Washington  and  with  public 
sentiment  generally  in  the  North. 

Colonel  George  A.  Porterfield,  on  May  4th,  was  ordered  by 
Robert  E.  Lee,  then  in  command  of  the  Virginia  forces,  to 
repair  to  Grafton,  the  junction  of  the  two  branches  of  the 
Baltimore  and  Ohio  Railroad,  and  there  assemble  the  Confed 
erate  troops  with  a  view  to  holding  that  part  of  the  State  of 
Virginia;  in  case,  however,  he  failed  in  this  and  was  unable 
permanently  to  hold  that  railroad,  he  was  instructed  to  cut  it. 

On  June  8th,  General  R.  S.  Garnett  was  assigned  by  Lee  to 
the  command  of  the  Confederate  troops  of  Northwestern 
Virginia. 

The  Union  forces  under  Col.  B.  F.  Kelly,  1st  Virginia  Vol 
unteers,  occupied  Grafton  May  3Oth,  the  forces  under  Porter- 
field  having  retired  without  a  fight  to  Phillippi,  about  sixteen 
miles  distant  on  a  turnpike  road  leading  from  Webster  (four 
miles  from  Grafton)  over  Laurel  Hill  to  Beverly.  As  roads 
are  few  in  Western  Virginia,  and  as  this  road  proved  to  be  one 
of  great  importance  in  the  campaign  upon  which  we  are  just 
entering,  it  may  be  well  to  say  that  it  continues  through  Hut- 
tonville,  across  Tygart's  Valley  River,  through  Cheat  Moun 
tain  Pass  over  the  summit  of  Cheat  Mountain,  thence  through 
Greenbrier  to  Staunton  at  the  head  of  the  Shenandoah  Valley. 

1  War  Records,  vol.  ii.,  p.  48. 


190  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

At  Beverly  it  is  intersected  by  another  turnpike  from  Clarks 
burg,  through  Buchannon  via  Middle  Fork  Bridge,  Roaring 
Creek  (west  of  Rich  Mountain),  Rich  Mountain  Summit,  etc. 
From  Huttonville  a  road  leads  southward  up  the  Tygart's  Val 
ley  River,  crossing  the  mouth  of  Elk  Water  about  seven  miles 
from  Huttonville,  thence  past  Big  Springs  on  Valley  Mountain 
to  Huntersville,  Virginia.  The  region  through  which  these 
roads  pass  is  mountainous. 

Ohio  and  Indiana  volunteers  made  up  the  body  of  the  army 
under  McClellan.  These  troops  assembled  first  in  the  vicinity 
of  Grafton.  The  first  camp  the  3d  Ohio  occupied  was  at  Fet- 
terman,  two  miles  west  of  Grafton.  Porterfield  made  a  halt  at 
Phillippi,  where  he  gathered  together  about  eight  hundred 
poorly-armed  and  disciplined  men.  Detachments  under  Col. 
B.  F.  Kelly  and  Col.  E.  Dumont  of  Indiana,  surprised  him, 
June  3d,  by  a  night  march,  and  captured  a  part  of  his  com 
mand,  much  of  his  supplies,  and  caused  him  to  retreat  with 
his  forces  disorganized  and  in  disgrace.  There  Colonel  Kelly 
was  seriously  wounded  by  a  pistol  shot.  General  Garnett, 
soon  after  the  affair  at  Phillippi,  collected  about  four  thousand 
men  at  Laurel  Hill,  on  the  road  leading  to  Beverly.  This 
position  was  naturally  a  strong  one,  and  was  soon  made 
formidable  with  earthworks  and  artillery.  He  took  command 
there  in  person.  At  the  foot  of  Rich  Mountain  (western  side), 
on  the  road  leading  from  Clarksville  through  Buchannon  to 
Beverly,  a  Confederate  force  of  about  two  thousand,  with 
considerable  artillery,  was  strongly  fortified,  commanded  by 
Colonel  John  Pegram,  late  of  the  U.S.A.  Beverly  was  made 
the  base  of  supplies  for  both  commands.  Great  activity  was 
displayed  to  recruit  and  equip  a  large  Confederate  force  to 
hold  Western  Virginia.  They  had  troops  on  the  Kanawha 
under  Gen.  Henry  A.  Wise  and  Gen.  J.  B.  Floyd.  The  latter 
was  but  recently  President  Buchanan's  Secretary  of  War. 

Brig. -Gen.  Thomas  A.  Morris  of  Indiana  was  given  about 
4000  men  after  the  affair  at  Phillippi  to  hold  and  watch  Garnett 
at  Laurel  Hill.  McClellan  having  concentrated  a  force  at 
Clarksburg  on  the  Parkersburg  stem  of  the  Baltimore  and 


Battle  of  Rich  Mountain  191 

Ohio  Railroad,  moved  it  thence  on  the  Beverly  road,  via 
Buchannon,  to  the  front  of  Pegram's  position. 

His  army  on  this  road  numbered  about  10,000. 

Gen.  Wm.  S.  Rosecrans,  the  second  in  command,  led  a 
brigade;  Gen.  N.  Schleigh,  a  three-months'  general  from 
Ohio,  and  Col.  Robert  L.  McCook  (gth  O.V.I.),  also  in  some 
temporary  way  commanded  brigades. 

The  3d  Ohio  Infantry  was  of  Schleigh's  brigade. 

While  the  troops  were  encamped  at  Buchannon,  Schleigh, 
on  July  6th,  without  the  knowledge  of  McClellan,  sent  two 
companies  under  Captain  Lawson  of  the  3d  Ohio  on  a  recon 
noitring  expedition  to  ascertain  the  position  of  the  enemy. 
Lawson  found  the  enemy's  advance  pickets  at  Middle  Fork 
Bridge,  and  a  spirited  fight  occurred  in  which  he  lost  one  man 
killed  and  inflicted  some  loss  on  the  enemy.  This  unauthorized 
expedition  caused  McClellan  to  censure  Schleigh,  who  was 
only  to  be  excused  on  the  score  of  inexperience. 

By  the  evening  of  July  Qth  the  Union  army  reached  and 
camped  on  Roaring  Creek,  near  the  base  of  Rich  Mountain, 
about  one  and  a  half  miles  from  the  front  of  Pegram's  fortified 
position. 

General  Morris  was  ordered  at  this  time  to  take  up  a  position 
immediately  confronting  Garnett's  entrenched  position  at 
Laurel  Hill,  to  watch  his  movements,  and,  if  he  attempted  to 
retreat,  to  attack  and  pursue  him. 

On  the  loth  of  July  the  4th  and  Qth  Ohio  Regiments  with 
Capt.  C.  O.  Loomis'  battery  (Cold  Water,  Mich.),  under  the 
direction  of  Lieut.  O.  M.  Poe  of  the  engineers,  made  a  recon- 
noissance  on  the  enemy's  front,  which  served  to  lead  McClellan 
to  believe  the  enemy's  "  intrenchments  were  held  by  a  large 
force,  with  several  guns  in  position  to  command  the  front  ap 
proaches^  and  that  a  direct  assault  would  result  in  a  heavy  and 
unnecessary  loss  of  life." 

This  belief,  he  says,  determined  him  to  make  an  effort  to 
turn  the  enemy's  flank  and  attack  him  in  the  rear. 

Rosecrans,  however,  has  the  honor  of  submitting,  about  10 
P.M.  of  the  night  of  July  loth,  a  plan  for  turning  the  enemy's 


i92  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

position,  which,  with  some  reluctance,  McClellan  directed  him 
to  carry  out. 

Rosecrans'  brigade  consisted  of  the  8th,  loth,  and  I3th  In 
diana,  igth  Ohio  and  Burdsell's  company  of  cavalry,  numbering 
in  all  1917  men. 

The  plan  proposed  by  Rosecrans  and  approved  by  McClellan 
was  first  suggested  by  a  young  man  by  the  name  of  Hart, 
whose  father's  house  stood  on  the  pike  near  the  summit  of 
Rich  Mountain,  two  miles  in  the  rear  of  Pegram's  position. 
Young  Hart  had  been  driven  from  home  by  the  presence  of 
Confederates,  and  was  eager  to  do  what  he  could  for  the  Union 
cause.  He  sought  Rosecrans,  and  proposed  to  lead  him  by 
an  unfrequented  route  around  the  enemy's  left,  and  under 
cover  of  the  dense  timber,  by  a  considerable  circuit,  to  the  crest 
of  Rich  Mountain,  thence  to  the  road  at  his  old  home  in  the 
enemy's  rear.  He  so  impressed  himself  on  Rosecrans  and 
those  around  him  as  to  secure  their  confidence  in  him  and  his 
plan.  In  arranging  details  it  was  ordered  that  Rosecrans, 
guided  by  Hart,  should,  at  daylight  of  the  nth,  leave  the 
main  road  about  one  mile  in  front  of  the  enemy's  fortifications, 
keep  under  cover  of  the  declivities  of  the  mountain  spurs,  avoid 
using  an  ax  or  anything  to  make  a  noise,  reach  the  road  at  the 
mountain  summit,  establish  himself  there  as  firmly  as  possible, 
and  from  thence  attack  the  enemy's  rear  by  the  main  road. 
While  Rosecrans  was  doing  this  McClellan  was  to  move  the 
body  of  the  army  close  under  the  enemy's  guns  and  be  in 
readiness  to  assault  in  front  on  its  being  known  that  Rosecrans 
was  ready  to  attack  in  the  rear. 

The  whole  distance  the  flanking  column  would  have  to  make 
was  estimated  to  be  five  miles,  but  it  proved  to  be  much 
greater.  The  mountain  was  not  only  steep,  but  extremely 
rocky  and  rugged.  Pegram,  after  inspection,  had  regarded  a 
movement  by  his  left  flank  to  his  rear  as  absolutely  impossible.1 

His  right  flank,  however,  was  not  so  well  protected  by  nature, 
and  to  avoid  surprise  from  this  direction  he  kept  pickets  and 
scouts  well  out  to  his  right.  Hart  regarded  a  movement 

1  Colonel  Pegram's  Rep.,  War  Records,  vol.  ii.,  p.  267. 


Battle  of  Rich  Mountain  193 

around  the  enemy's  right  as  certain  of  discovery,  and  hence 
not  likely  to  be  successful. 

Promptly  at  day-dawn  Rosecrans  passed  into  the  mountain 
fastness,  whither  the  adventurous  hunter  only  had  rarely 
penetrated,  accompanied  by  Col.  F.  W.  Lander,  a  volunteer 
aide-de-camp  of  McClellan's  staff — a  man  of  much  frontier 
experience  in  the  West.  In  a  rain  lasting  five  hours  the 
column  slowly  struggled  through  the  dense  timber,  up  the 
mountain,  crossing  and  recrossing  ravines  by  tortuous  ways, 
and  by  I  P.M.  it  had  arrived  near  the  mountain  top,  but  yet 
some  distance  to  the  southward  of  where  the  Beverly  road  led 
through  a  depression,  over  the  summit.  After  a  brief  rest, 
when,  on  nearing  the  road  at  Hart's  house,  it  was  discovered 
and  fired  on  unexpectedly  by  the  enemy. 

To  understand  how  it  turned  out  that  the  enemy  was  found 
near  the  summit  where  he  was  not  expected,  it  is  necessary 
to  recur  to  what  McClellan  was  doing  in  the  enemy's  front. 
Hart  had  assured  Rosecrans  there  was  no  hostile  force  on  the 
summit  of  the  mountain,  and  on  encountering  the  Confederates 
there,  Rosecrans  for  the  time  suspected  his  guide  of  treachery. 

But  first  an  incident  occurred  in  the  3d  Ohio  Regiment 
worth  mentioning.  I.  H.  Marrow,  its  Colonel,  who  professed 
to  be  in  confidential  relations  with  McCiellan,  returned  from 
headquarters  about  midnight  of  the  loth,  and  assuming  to  be 
possessed  of  the  plans  for  the  next  day,  and  pregnant  with 
the  great  events  to  follow,  called  out  the  regiment,  and 
solemnly  addressed  it  in  substance  as  follows : 

"  Soldiers  of  the  Third  :  The  assault  on  the  enemy's  works  will  be 
made  in  the  early  morning.  The  Third  will  lead  the  column.  The 
secessionists  have  ten  thousand  men  and  forty  rifled  cannon.  They 
are  strongly  fortified.  They  have  more  men  and  more  cannon  than 
we  have.  They  will  cut  us  to  pieces.  Marching  to  attack  such  an 
enemy,  so  intrenched  and  so  armed,  is  marching  to  a  butcher-shop, 
rather  than  to  a  battle.  There  is  bloody  work  ahead.  Many  of 
you,  boys,  will  go  out  who  will  never  come  back  again."  1 

1  Citizen  Soldier  (John  Beatty),  p.  22. 
VOL.  i.— 13. 


i94  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

This  speech,  thus  delivered  to  soldiers  unused  to  battle  was 
calculated  to  cause  the  credulous  to  think  of  friends,  home- 
death,  and  it  certainly  had  no  tendency  to  inspire  the  untried 
volunteers  with  hope  and  confidence.  The  speech  was,  of 
course,  the  wild,  silly  vaporings  of  a  weak  man. 

I  was  sent  with  a  detachment  of  the  3d  Ohio  to  picket  the 
road  in  front  of  the  enemy  and  in  advance  of  the  point  from 
whence  Rosecrans  had  left  it  to  ascend  the  mountain.  My 
small  force  took  up  a  position  less  than  one  half  mile  from  the 
enemy's  fortified  position,  driving  back  his  pickets  at  the  dawn 
of  day  through  the  dense  timber  on  each  side  of  the  road. 
About  9  A.M.  a  mounted  orderly  from  McClellan  came  gallop 
ing  from  camp  carrying  a  message  for  Rosecrans,  said  to  be 
a  countermand  of  former  orders,  and  requiring  him  to  halt  until 
another  and  better  plan  of  movement  could  be  made.  The 
messenger  was,  as  he  stoutly  insisted,  directed  to  overtake 
Rosecrans  by  pursuing  a  route  to  the  enemy's  right,  whereas 
Rosecrans  had  gone  to  our  right  and  the  enemy's  left.  Of  this 
the  orderly  was  not  only  informed  by  me,  but  he  was  warned 
of  the  proximity  of  the  Confederate  pickets.  He  persisted, 
however,  in  the  error,  and  presented  the  authority  of  the  com 
manding  General  to  pass  all  Union  pickets.  This  was  reluc 
tantly  respected,  and  the  ill-fated  orderly  galloped  on  in  search 
of  a  route  to  his  left.  In  a  moment  or  two  the  sharp  crack  of 
a  rifle  was  heard,  and  almost  immediately  the  horse  of  the 
orderly  came  dashing  into  our  picket  lines,  wounded  and  rider 
less.  The  story  was  told.  The  dispatch,  with  its  bearer,  dead 
or  alive,  was  in  the  enemy's  hands.  The  orderly  was,  how 
ever,  not  killed,  but  had  been  seriously  hurt  by  a  rifle  ball. 
He  and  his  dispatch  for  Rosecrans  gave  Pegram  his  first 
knowledge  of  the  movements  of  the  column  to  the  mountain 
summit. 

For  reasons  already  stated,  Pegram  entertained  no  fear  of  an 
attack  on  his  left  and  rear,  but  was  somewhat  apprehensive 
that  his  right  was  not  equally  secure,  and  hence,  early  on  the 
i  ith,  he  had  sent  a  small  picket  to  near  Hart's  house  and  taken 
the  further  precaution  to  have  his  right  vigilantly  watched. 


Battle  of  Rich  Mountain  195 

The  message  found  on  the  captured  orderly  informed  Pegram 
that  Rosecrans  was  leading  a  column  to  his  rear.1  The  latter 
thereupon  sent  a  strong  reinforcement  under  Captain  Julius 
A.  De  Lagnel  to  the  picket  already  on  the  mountain  summit. 
By  reason  of  the  expected  approach  of  a  force  around  the 
right,  breastworks  were  hastily  thrown  up  and  two  pieces  of 
artillery  put  in  position  to  repel  an  attack  from  that  direction. 
Pegram,  in  his  uncertainty,  concluded  that  Rosecrans  might 
take  a  still  wider  circuit  around  his  right  and  thus  pass  over 
the  mountain  by  a  pathway  or  road  leading  into  the  turnpike 
one  and  a  half  miles  from  Beverly;  and  to  guard  against  this 
he  ordered  Col.  Wm.  C.  Scott,  with  the  44th  Virginia,  then  at 
Beverly,  to  take  position  with  two  pieces  of  artillery  at  the 
junction  of  the  roads  mentioned,  and  to  scout  well  the  flanking 
road.2 

The  unexpected  presence  of  the  enemy  at  the  summit  of  the 
mountain  is  thus  explained,  and  the  reliability  and  faithfulness 
of  the  guide  vindicated.  Captain  De  Lagnel,  as  well  as  Rose 
crans,  was  doomed  also  to  a  surprise. 

Rosecrans'  command  debouched  from  the  wooded  mountain 
and  along  its  crest  upon  the  rear  of  De  Lagnel's  position,  and 
new  dispositions  of  the  Confederate  force  had  to  be  made  to 
meet  the  attack. 

The  position  of  De  Lagnel's  force  was  on  and  near  the  line 
of  the  turnpike  as  it  passed  over  the  mountain,  and  hence 
Rosecrans'  column,  in  its  approach  from  the  southward,  hav 
ing  gained  the  heights  some  distance  from  the  road,  was  from 
a  greater  elevation. 

The  loth  Indiana,  under  Colonel  Manson,  was  in  advance 
and  received  the  first  fire  of  the  enemy. 

After  a  delay  of  some  forty  minutes,  during  which  time  the 
enemy  was  receiving  reinforcements,  and  both  sides  rectifying 

1  It  seems  that  this  orderly  did  decline  to  say  which  flank  Rosecrans  was  turn 
ing,  as  he  must  have  had  doubts  after  what  had  transpired  as  to  his  instructions  ; 
nevertheless  Pegram  decided  Rosecrans  was  passing  around  his  right,  and  so 
notified  Garnett. —  War  Records,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  256,  260,  272. 

^  Ibid. ,  vol.  ii.,  p.  275. 


196  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

their  positions  to  the  real  situation,  the  order  to  advance  and 
attack  was  given  by  Rosecrans,  and  though  the  troops  were 
new  and  little  drilled,  they  were  well  led  and  responded  gal 
lantly.  The  battle  proper  did  not  last  beyond  fifteen  minutes. 
The  Confederates  made  a  brave  resistance,  but  they  were  not 
exceeding  800  strong,  and  though  they  had  the  advantage  of 
artillery,  they  were  not  advantageously  posted,  consequently 
were  soon  overthrown,  their  commander  being  shot  down,  and 
21  prisoners,  about  50  stand  of  arms,  2  pieces  of  artillery,  and 
some  supplies  taken.  The  Union  loss  was  12  killed  and  49 
wounded,  and  the  Confederate  loss  probably  about  the  same. 

Captain  De  Lagnel  was,  by  both  sides,  reported  killed,  and 
his  gallantry  was  highly  lauded.'  General  McClellan  and  others 
of  the  regular  army  officers  assumed  next  day  to  recognize  his 
body  and  to  know  him,  and  to  deplore  his  early  death.  He 
had  been  shortly  before,  as  we  have  seen,  captured  as  a  Union 
officer  at  Fayetteville,  N.  C.,  and  had  at  a  still  later  date  re 
signed  from  the  U.S.A.  His  alleged  death,  being  generally 
reported  through  the  Confederacy,  was  made  the  occasion  of 
many  funeral  sermons  and  orations,  eulogizing  his  Southern 
loyalty  and  glorious  sacrifice  of  life  "  on  the  heights  of  Rich 
Mountain  "  in  the  cause  of  human  slavery,  called  Southern 
rights,  or  Southern  freedom. 

But  we  shall  hear  of  De  Lagnel  again. 

Pegram,  learning  of  the  disaster  on  the  mountain  in  his  rear, 
called  his  best  troops  around  him  and  in  person  started  to  at 
tack  and  dislodge  Rosecrans.  He  reached  the  proximity  of 
the  battlefield  about  6  P.M.,  but  being  advised  by  his  officers 
that  his  men  were  demoralized,  and  could  not  be  relied  on, 
desisted  from  attacking,  and  returned  to  his  main  camp  and 
position.2 

Of  the  dispersed  Confederate  forces  some  escaped  towards 
Beverly,  joining  Scott's  44th  Virginia  on  the  way,  and  others 
were  driven  back  to  the  fortified  camp  and  to  join  Pegram. 

While  Rosecrans  was  operating  on  the  enemy's  rear,  Mc- 

1  War  Records,  vol.  ii.,  p.  245. 

*  Ibid.,  (Pegram's  Report),  vol.  ii.,  p.  265. 


Battle  of  Rich  Mountain  197 

Clellan  was  inactive  in  front.  McClellan  claimed  he  was  to 
receive  hourly  word  from  Rosecrans  during  his  progress  through 
and  up  the  rugged  mountain,  and  not  thus  often  hearing  from 
him,  he,  in  the  presence  of  his  officers,  denounced  the  move 
ment,  and  put  upon  Rosecrans  the  responsibility  of  its  then 
predicted  certain  failure. 

The  only  information  he  received  from  Rosecrans  during  the 
day  was  a  message  announcing  the  successful  progress  of  the 
column  at  1 1  A.M.  on  the  I  ith  ;  it  was  then  approaching  Hart's 
house,  and  about  one  and  a  half  miles  distant  from  it.1 

The  arrangement  made  in  advance  was  that  on  Rosecrans 
gaining  a  position  on  the  mountain  he  was  to  move  down  it 
upon  Pegram's  rear,  and  McClellan  with  the  main  army  was 
to  attack  from  the  front.  It  was  not  contemplated  that  Pe- 
gram  should  be  fully  advised  of  the  plan  before  it  could  be,  in 
considerable  part,  executed.  Rosecrans'  men,  being  much 
exhausted  by  the  laborious  ascent  of  the  precipitous  mountain, 
and  having  to  fight  an  unexpected  battle,  did  not  advance  to 
attack  the  enemy's  intrenchments  in  the  rear,  but  awaited  the 
sound  of  McClellan's  guns  on  the  front.  The  day  was  too  far 
spent  to  communicate  the  situation  by  messengers,  and  Mc 
Clellan  remained  for  the  day  and  succeeding  night  in  total 
ignorance  of  the  real  result  of  the  battle ;  and  though  its  smoke 
could  be  plainly  seen,  and  the  sound  of  musketry  and  artillery 
distinctly  heard  from  his  position,  from  circumstances  which 
appeared  to  be  occurring  in  the  enemy's  camp  after  the  sound 
of  the  battle  had  ceased,  McClellan  reached  the  conclusion 
Rosecrans  was  defeated,  if  not  captured  or  destroyed,  and  this 
led  McClellan  and  certain  members  of  his  staff  to  industriously 
announce  that  Rosecrans  had  disobeyed  orders  and  would  be 
held  responsible  for  the  disaster  which  had  occurred.  Mc 
Clellan  remained  with  the  main  body  of  his  army  quietly  in 
camp  on  Roaring  Creek  until  about  midday  when,  he  states  in 
his  report,  "  I  moved  up  all  my  available  force  to  the  front  and 
remained  in  person  just  in  rear  of  the  advance  pickets,  ready 
to  assault  when  the  indicated  movement  arrived." 

1  War  Records  (McCbllan's  Report),  vol.  ii.,  p.  206. 


Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

While  the  troops  were  waiting  for  the  "  indicated  move 
ment,"  the  enemy  had  drawn  in  his  skirmishers  in  expectation 
of  an  assault.  I  was  on  the  front  with  the  skirmishers,  and  in 
my  eagerness  and  inexperience  naturally  desired  to  see  the  real 
situation  of  the  enemy's  fortifications  and  guns.  With  two  or 
three  fearless  soldiers  following  closely,  and  without  orders, 
by  a  little  detour  through  brush  and  timber  to  the  left  of  the 
principal  road,  I  came  out  in  front  of  the  fortifications  close 
under  some  of  the  guns  and  obtained  a  good  survey  of  them. 
The  enemy,  apprehending  an  assault,  opened  fire  on  us  with  a 
single  discharge  from  one  piece  of  artillery,1  which  he  was  not 
able  to  depress  sufficiently  to  do  us  any  harm.  We,  however, 
withdrew  precipitately,  and  I  attempted  at  once  to  report  to 
McClellan  the  situation  and  location  of  the  guns  of  the  enemy 
and  the  strength  and  position  of  his  fortified  camp,  but,  instead 
of  thanks  for  the  information,  I  received  a  fierce  rebuke,  and 
was  sharply  told  that  my  conduct  might  have  resulted  in  bring 
ing  on  a  general  battle  before  the  General  was  ready.  I  never 
sinned  in  that  way  again  while  in  McClellan's  command. 

Late  in  the  afternoon  of  the  nth,  when  the  sound  of  the 
battle  on  the  mountain  had  ceased,  an  officer  was  seen  to  gal 
lop  into  the  camp  of  the  enemy  on  the  mountain  side;  he 
made  a  vehement  address  to  the  troops  there,  and  the  loud 
cheers  with  which  they  responded  were  ditsinctly  heard  in  our 
camp. 

This  proceeding  being  reported  to  McClellan,  at  once  settled 
him  and  others  around  him  in  the  belief  that  Rosecrans  had 
been  defeated.  A  little  later  Confederate  troops  were  seen 
moving  to  the  rear  and  up  the  mountain.  This,  instead  of 
being  interpreted  as  reinforcements  for  defeated  troops,  as  it 
really  was,  was  taken  as  a  possible  aggressive  movement  which, 
in  some  occult  way,  must  assail  and  overthrow  the  main  army 
in  front.  As  the  day  wore  away,  Poe,  of  the  engineers,  was 
sent  to  our  right  to  find  a  position  on  the  immediate  left  of  the 
enemy  where  artillery  could  be  used.  I  was  detailed  with  two 
companies  of  the  3d  Ohio  to  accompany  him.  We  climbed  a 

1  Citizen  Soldier  (Beatty),  p.  24. 


Battle  of  Rich  Mountain  199 

mountain  spur  and  soon  reached  a  position  within  rifle-musket 
range  of  the  enemy  which  completely  commanded  his  guns  and 
fortifications.  So  near  was  my  command  that  I  desired  per 
mission  to  open  fire  without  awaiting  the  arrival  of  artillery, 
but  this  not  being  given  by  Poe,  of  the  headquarters  staff,  and 
being  fresh  from  a  rebuke  from  that  quarter,  I  gave  a  per 
emptory  order  not  to  fire  unless  attacked.  On  discovering  us 
in  his  rear,  the  enemy  turned  his  guns  and  fired  a  few  artillery 
shots  at  us,  doing  no  harm,,  but  affording  a  plausible  excuse 
for  a  discharge  of  musketry  that  seemed  to  silence  the  enemy's 
guns,  as  their  firing  at  once  ceased. 

Poe  was  a  young  officer  of  fine  personal  appearance,  superb 
physique,  a  West  Point  graduate,  and  a  grandson  of  one  of 
the  celebrated  Indian  fighters,  especially  noted  for  killing  the 
Wyandot  Chief,  Big  Foot,  on  the  Ohio  River  in  1782. 

Poe  was  on  staff  duty  throughout  the  war ;  became  a  Brevet- 
Brigadier,  corps  of  engineers,  and  died  as  a  Colonel  in  the 
United  States  army  at  Detroit,  Michigan,  October  2,  1895. 

My  acquaintance  with  him  commenced  on  the  spur  of  Rich 
Mountain  under  the  circumstances  mentioned. 

McClellan,  in  his  report,  says : 

"  I  sent  Lieutenant  Poe  to  find  such  a  position  for  our  artillery  as 
would  enable  us  to  command  the  works.  Late  in  the  afternoon  I 
received  his  report  that  he  had  found  such  a  place.  I  immediately 
detailed  a  party  to  cut  a  road  to  it  for  our  guns,  but  it  was  too  late 
to  get  them  into  position  before  dark,  and  as  I  had  received  no  in 
telligence  whatever  of  General  Rosecrans'  movements,  I  finally  de 
termined  to  return  to  camp,  leaving  merely  sufficient  force  to  cover 
the  working  party.  Orders  were  then  given  to  move  up  the  guns 
with  the  entire  available  infantry  at  daybreak  the  following  morn 
ing.  As  the  troops  were  much  fatigued,  some  delay  occurred  in 
moving  from  camp,  and  just  as  the  guns  were  starting  intelligence 
was  received  that  the  enemy  had  evacuated  their  works  and  fled 
over  the  mountains,  leaving  all  their  guns,  means  of  transportation, 
ammunition,  tents,  and  baggage  behind. 

"  Then  for  the  first  time  since  n  o'clock  the  previous  day,  I  re 
ceived  a  communication  from  General  Rosecrans,  giving  me  the 


200  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

first  intimation   that  he  had  taken  the  enemy's  position  at  Hart's 
farm." 

Here  was  a  commanding  general  in  the  peculiar  situation 
that  he  could  almost  see  and  could  plainly  hear  a  battle  raging, 
but  did  not  learn  its  successful  result  until  fifteen  hours  after 
it  ceased. 

I  remained  on  the  mountain  spur  in  command  of  a  few  com 
panies  of  infantry  with  orders  to  keep  the  men  standing  in  line 
of  battle,  without  fires,  during  the  entire  night.  It  rained 
most  of  the  time,  and  the  weather  becoming  cold  the  men 
suffered  intensely.  The  rest  of  the  army  retired  to  its  camp  a 
mile  and  a  half  distant. 

Pegrarn  gathered  his  demoralized  forces  together,  and  with 
such  as  were  supposed  able  to  make  a  long  march,  started 
about  midnight  to  escape  by  a  mountain  path  around  to  the 
westward  of  the  Hart  farm,  hoping  to  gain  the  main  road  and 
join  Garnett's  forces,  still  supposed  to  be  at  Laurel  Hill. 

On  the  morning  of  the  I2th  of  July  we  found  a  few  broken- 
down  men  in  Pegram's  late  camp,  and  a  considerable  number 
of  mere  boys — students  from  William  and  Mary  and  Hamden- 
Sidney  colleges — too  young  yet  for  war. 

McClellan  and  his  staff,  with  dazzling  display,  rode  through 
the  deserted  works,  viewed  the  captured  guns,  gazed  on  the 
dejected  prisoners,  and  then  wired  the  War  Department:  "  In 
possession  of  all  the  enemy's  works  up  to  a  point  in  sight  of 
Beverly.  Have  taken  all  his  guns.  .  .  .  Behavior  of 
troops  in  action  and  towards  prisoners  admirable." 

The  army  moved  up  the  mountain  to  the  battle-field,  and 
halted  a  few  moments  to  view  it.  The  sight  of  men  with  gun 
shot  wounds  was  the  first  for  the  new  volunteers,  and  they 
were  deeply  impressed  by  it ;  all  looked  upon  those  who  had 
participated  in  the  battle  as  veritable  heroes. 

Late  on  the  I2th  the  troops  reached  Beverly,  the  junction 
of  the  turnpike  roads  far  in  the  rear  of  Laurel  Hill,  and  there 
bivouacked. 

Garnett,  learning  of  Pegram's  disaster  at  Rich  Mountain, 

1  War  Records,  vol.  ii.,  p.  206. 


Battle  of  Rich  Mountain  201 

abandoned  his  intrenchments  at  Laurel  Hill,  and  leaving  his 
tents  and  other  property  hastily  retreated  towards  Beverly, 
pursued  rather  tardily  by  Morris'  command.  Had  Garnett 
pushed  his  army  rapidly  through  Beverly  he  could  have  passed 
it  in  safety  on  the  afternoon  of  the  i2th,  but  being  falsely  in 
formed  that  it  was  occupied  in  the  morning  of  that  day  by 
McClellan's  troops,  he  turned  off  at  Leadsville  Church,  about 
five  miles  from  Beverly,  and  retreated  up  the  Leading  Creek 
road,  a  very  rough  and  difficult  one  to  travel.  A  portion  of 
Morris'  command,  led  by  Captain  Benham  of  the  regular 
army,  followed  in  close  pursuit,  while  others  went  quietly  into 
camp  under  Morris'  orders. 

Pegram,  with  his  fleeing  men,  succeeded  in  rinding  a  way 
over  the  mountain,  and  at  7  P.M.  of  the  I2th  reached  Tygart's 
Valley  River,  near  the  Beverly  and  Laurel  Hill  road,  about 
three  miles  from  Leadsville  Church.  They  had  travelled  with 
out  road  or  path  about  twelve  miles,  and  were  broken  down 
and  starving.  Pegram  here  learned  from  inhabitants  of  Gar- 
nett's  retreat,  the  Union  pursuit,  and  of  the  Union  occupancy 
of  Beverly.  All  hope  of  escape  in  a  body  was  gone,  and 
though  distant  six  miles  from  Beverly,  he  dispatched  a  note 
to  the  commanding  officer  of  the  Union  forces,  saying: 

"  Owing  to  the  reduced  and  almost  famished  condition  of  the 
force  now  here  under  my  command,  I  am  compelled  to  offer  to  sur 
render  them  to  you  as  prisoners  of  war.  I  have  only  to  ask  that  they 
receive  at  your  hands  such  treatment  as  Northern  prisoners  have 
invariably  received  from  the  South." 

McClellan  sent  staff  officers  to  Pegram's  camp  to  conduct 
him  and  his  starving  soldiers  to  Beverly,  they  numbering  30 
officers  and  525  men.1  Others  escaped. 

The  prisoners  were  paroled  and  sent  South  on  July  I5th, 
save  such  of  the  officers,  including  Colonel  Pegram,  as  had 
recently  left  the  United  States  army  to  join  the  Confederate 
States  army;  these  were  retained  and  sent  to  Fort  McHenry.2 

1  War  Records  (Pegram's  Report),  vol.  ii.,  p.  267. 

2  At  Beverly  lived  a  sister  of  Thomas  J.  Jackson  (Stonewall),  Mrs.  Arnold,  who, 


202  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

Garnett  retreated  through  Tucker  County  to  Kalea's  Ford 
on  Cheat  River,  where  he  camped  on  the  night  of  the  I2th. 
His  rear  was  overtaken  on  the  I3th  at  Carrick's  Ford,  and  a 
lively  engagement  took  place,  with  loss  on  both  sides;  during 
a  skirmish  at  another  ford  about  a  mile  from  Carrick's,  Garnett, 
while  engaged  in  covering  his  retreat  and  directing  skirmish 
ers,  was  killed  by  a  rifle  ball.1 

Garnett  had  been  early  selected  for  promotion  in  the  Con 
federate  army,  and  he  promised  to  become  a  distinguished 
leader.  His  army,  now  much  demoralized  and  disorganized, 
continued  its  retreat  via  Horse-Shoe  Run  and  Red  House, 
Maryland,  to  Monterey,  Virginia.  General  C.  W.  Hill, 
through  timidity  or  inexperience,  permitted  the  broken  Con 
federate  troops  to  pass  him  unmolested  at  Red  House,  where, 
as  ordered,  he  should  have  concentrated  a  superior  force. 

McClellan,  July  I4th,  moved  his  army  over  the  road  leading 
through  Huttonville  to  Cheat  Mountain  Pass,  and  a  portion 
of  it  pursued  a  small  force  of  the  enemy  to  and  beyond  the 
summit  of  Cheat  Mountain,  on  the  Staunton  pike,  but  no 
enemy  was  overtaken,  and  the  campaign  was  at  an  end. 

It  was  the  first  campaign ;  it  had  the  appearance  of  success, 
and  McClellan,  by  his  dispatches,  gathered  to  himself  all  the 
glory  of  it.  He  received  the  commendation  of  General  Scott, 
the  President,  and  his  Cabinet.2 

From  Beverly,  July  16,  1861,  McClellan  issued  a  painfully 
vain,  congratulatory  address  to  the  "  Soldiers  of  the  Army  of 
the  West. ' '  3 

As  early  as  July  21,  1861,  he  dispatched  his  wife  that  he 
did  not  "  feel  sure  that  the  men  would  fight  very  well  under 
anyone  but  himself";  and  that  it  was  absolutely  necessary 
for  him  to  go  in  person  to  the  Kanawha  to  attack  General 
Wise.  Thus  far  he  had  led  no  troops  in  battle.  The  Union 
defeat,  on  this  date,  at  Bull  Run,  however,  turned  attention 
to  McClellan,  as  he  alone,  apparently,  had  achieved  success, 

though   her  husband  was  also    disloyal,    was  a  pronounced   Union   woman  and 
remained  devoted  to  the  Union  cause  through  the  war. 

1  War  Records,  vol.  ii.,  p.  287.  2  Ibid.,  p.  204.  3 Ibid.,  p.  236. 


Battle  of  Rich  Mountain  203 

though  a  success,  as  we  have  seen,  mainly,  if  not  wholly,  due 
to  Rosecrans. 

On  July  22,  1861,  he  was  summoned  to  Washington,  and  on 
the  24th  left  his  "  Army  of  the  West  "  to  assume  other  and 
more  responsible  military  duties,  of  which  we  will  not  here 
speak.  In  dismissing  him  from  this  narrative,  I  desire  to  say 
that  I  wrote  to  a  friend  in  July,  1861,  an  opinion  as  to  the 
capacity  and  character  of  McClellan  as  a  military  leader,  which 
I  have  not  since  felt  called  on  to  revise,  and  one  now  generally 
accepted  by  the  thoughtful  men  of  this  country.  McClellan 
wras  kind  and  generous,  but  weak,  and  so  inordinately  vain 
that  he  thought  it  unnecessary  to  accept  the  judgment  of  men 
of  higher  attainments  and  stronger  character.  Even  now 
strong  men  shudder  when  they  recall  the  fact  that  George  B. 
McClellan  apparently  had,  for  a  time,  in  his  keeping  the  destiny 
of  the  Republic. 

To  indicate  the  state  of  his  mind,  and  likewise  the  immensity 
of  his  vanity,  I  here  give  an  extract  from  a  letter,  of  August  9, 
1861,  to  his  wife,  leaving  the  reader  to  make  his  own  com 
ment  and  draw  his  own  conclusions. 

"  General  Scott  is  the  great  obstacle.  He  will  not  comprehend 
the  danger.  I  have  to  fight  my  way  against  him.  To-morrow  the 
question  will  probably  be  decided  by  giving  me  absolute  control 
independently  of  him.  .  .  .  The  people  call  on  me  to  save  the 
country,  /must  save  it,  and  cannot  respect  anything  that  is  in  the 
way. 

"  I  receive  letter  after  letter,  have  conversation  after  conversa 
tion,  calling  on  me  to  save  the  nation,  alluding  to  the  presidency, 
dictatorship,  etc.  .  /  would  cheerfully  take  the  dictatorship 

and  agree  to  lay  down  my  life  when  the  country  is  saved, ' '  etc  ' 

General  McClellan  was  not  disloyal,  nor  did  he  lack  a  tech 
nical  military  education.  He  was  a  good  husband,  an  in 
dulgent  father,  a  kind  and  devoted  friend,  of  pure  life,  but 
unfortunately  he  was  for  a  time  mistaken  for  a  great  soldier, 
and  this  mistake  he  never  himself  discovered. 

1  McClellan' s  Own  Story,  p.  84. 


204  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

He  had  about  him,  while  holding  high  command,  many  real 
and  professed  friends,  most  of  whom  partook  of  his  habits  of 
thought  and  possessed  only  his  characteristics.  President 
Lincoln  did  not  fail  to  understand  him,  but  sustained  and 
long  stood  by  him  for  want  of  a  known  better  leader  for  the 
Eastern  army,  and  because  he  had  many  adherents  among 
military  officers. 

Greeley,  in  the  first  volume  of  his  American  Conflict,  written 
at  the  beginning  of  the  war,  has  a  page  containing  the  portraits 
of  twelve  of  the  then  most  distinguished  "  Union  Generals." 
Scott  is  the  central  figure,  and  around  him  are  McClellan, 
Butler,  McDowell,  Wool,  Fremont,  Halleck,  Burnside,  Hun 
ter,  Hooker,  Buel,  and  Anderson.  All  survived  the  war,  and 
not  one  of  them  was  at  its  close  a  distinguished  commander  in 
the  field.  One  or  two  at  most  had  maintained  only  creditable 
standing  as  officers;  the  others  (Scott  excepted,  who  retired 
on  account  of  great  age)  having  proved,  for  one  cause  or 
another,  failures. 

In  Greeley's  second  volume,  published  at  the  close  of  the 
war,  is  another  group  of  "  Union  Generals."  Grant  is  the 
central  figure,  and  around  him  are  Sherman,  Sheridan, 
Thomas,  Meade,  Hancock,  Blair,  Howard,  Terry,  Curtis, 
Banks,  and  Gilmore — not  one  of  the  first  twelve;  and  he  did 
not  even  then  exhaust  the  list  of  great  soldiers  who  fairly  won 
eternal  renown. 

The  true  Chieftains  had  to  be  evolved  in  the  flame  of  battle, 
amid  the  exigencies  of  the  long,  bloody  war,  and  they  had  to 
win  their  promotions  on  the  field. 


CHAPTER  IV 

REPULSE   OF  GENERAL   LEE,  AND   AFFAIRS  AT  CHEAT    MOUN 
TAIN  AND  IN  TYGART'S  VALLEY  (SEPTEMBER,   1861)— 

KILLING    OF    JOHN    A.    WASHINGTON,    AND    INCIDENTS, 
AND    FORMATION   OF   STATE   OF   WEST   VIRGINIA 

GENERAL  ROSECRANS,  from  headquarters  at  Graf- 
ton,  July  25,  1861,  assumed  command  of  the  "  Army 
of  Occupation  in  Western  Virginia."  He  subse 
quently  removed  his  headquarters  to  the  field  on  the  Kanawha 
and  there  actively  participated  in  campaigns. 

Brigadier-General  Joseph  J.  Reynolds,  of  Indiana,  a  regular 
officer,  was  assigned  to  the  first  brigade  and  to  command  the 
troops  in  the  Cheat  Mountain  region. 

Many  of  the  troops  who  served  under  McClellan  were  three- 
months'  men  who  responded  to  President  Lincoln's  first  call 
and,  as  their  terms  of  service  expired,  were  mustered  out, 
thus  materially  reducing  the  strength  of  the  army  in  Western 
Virginia,  and  as  the  danger  apprehended  at  Washington  was 
great,  new  regiments,  as  rapidly  as  they  could  be  organized, 
were  sent  there. 

Already  a  movement  at  Wheeling  had  commenced  to  re 
pudiate  the  secession  of  Virginia,  and  to  organize  a  state 
government,  and  subsequently  a  new  State. 

Great  efforts  were  put  forth  at  Richmond  by  Governor 
Letcher  and  the  Confederate  authorities  to  regain  possession 
of  Western  Virginia  and  to  suppress  this  loyal  political  move 
ment. 

John  B.  Floyd  and  Henry  A.  Wise,  both  in  the  Confederate 

20=, 


206  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

service,  and  others  were  active  on  the  Kanawha  and  in  South 
western  Virginia,  but  as  the  line  from  Staunton  across  Cheat 
Mountain  led  to  Buchannon  and  Clarksburg,  and  also  via 
Laurel  Hill  to  Webster  and  Grafton,  striking  the  Baltimore 
and  Ohio  Railroad  at  two  points,  it  was  regarded  at  Richmond 
as  the  gateway  to  Western  Virginia  which,  if  opened,  would 
insure  its  permanent  recovery. 

General  R.  E.  Lee,  from  the  first  a  favorite  of  the  Confed 
erate  authorities,  who  had  thus  far  won  no  particular  renown, 
not  even  participating  in  the  Bull  Run  battle  and  campaign, 
was  now  (about  August  1st)  sent  to  Western  Virginia  "  to 
strike  a  decisive  blow  at  the  enemy  in  that  quarter."  1 

He  established  his  headquarters  at  Staunton,  but  we  find 
him,  in  August,  with  his  main  army  at  Valley  Mountain  (Big 
Springs),  on  the  Huntersville  road,  and  about  twelve  miles 
south  of  the  Union  camp  at  Elk  Water  on  the  Tygart's  Valley 
River.  General  W.  W.  Loring,  late  of  the  United  States 
Army,  an  officer  who  won  some  fame  in  the  Mexican  War,  was 
in  immediate  command  of  the  Confederate  troops  at  Valley 
Mountain.  Brigadier-General  H.  R.  Jackson — not  Stonewall 
Jackson,  as  so  often  stated — commanded  the  Confederate 
forces,  subject  to  the  orders  of  Loring,  on  the  Greenbrier,  on 
the  Staunton  road  leading  over  Cheat  Mountain  to  Hutton- 
ville.  On  these  two  lines  Lee  soon  had  above  1 1,000  effective 
soldiers  present  for  duty,  and  he  could  draw  others  from  Floyd 
and  Wise  in  the  Kanawha  country.2 

Confronting  Lee's  army  was  the  command  of  General 
Reynolds,  with  headquarters  at  Cheat  Mountain  Pass,3  three 

1  No  order  assigning  Lee  to  Western  Virginia  seems  to  have  been  issued,  but  see 
Davis  to  J.  E.  Johnson  of  August  i,  1861,    War  Records,  vol.  v.,  p.  767. 

2  An  abstract  of  a  return  of  Loring's  forces  for  October,  1861,  shows  present  for 
duty  11,700  of  all  arms. —  War  Records,  vol.  v.,  p.  933. 

3  While  the  Third  Ohio  was  temporarily  camped  in  Cheat  Mountain  Pass  (July, 
1861),  word  came  of  the  Bull  Run  disaster,  and  while  brooding  over  it  Colonel 
John  Beatty,  in  the  privacy  of  our  tent,  early  one  morning  before  we  had  arisen, 
exclaimed  in  substance:   "That  so  long  as  the  Union  army  fought  to  maintain 
human  slavery  it  deserved  defeat ;  that  only  when  it  fought  for  the  liberty  of  all 
mankind  would  God  give  us  victory."    Such  prophetic  talk  was  then  premature,  and 
if  openly  uttered  would  have  insured  censure  from  General  McClellan  and  others. 


Cheat  Mountain  and  Repulse  of  Lee       207 

miles  from  Huttonville  on  the  Staunton  pike.  Here  Colonel 
Sullivan's  I3th  Indiana,  part  of  Loomis'  battery,  and  Brack 
en's  Indiana  Cavalry  were  camped.  On  Cheat  Mountain,  at 
the  middle  mountain-top,  about  nine  miles  to  the  southeast 
of  Huttonville  on  the  Staunton  pike,  were  the  I4th  Indiana, 
24th  and  25th  Ohio,  and  parts  of  the  same  battery  and  cavalry, 
Colonel  Nathan  Kimball  of  the  I4th  in  command.  At  Camp 
Elk  Water,  about  one  mile  north  of  the  mouth  of  Elk  Water 
in  the  Tygart's  River  Valley,  and  about  seven  miles  southward 
from  Huttonville  on  the  Huntersville  pike,  the  I5th  and  i/th 
Indiana  and  the  3d  and  6th  Ohio  Infantry,  and  still  another 
part  of  Loomis'  battery,  were  posted.  Reynolds'  entire  com 
mand  did  not  exceed  4000  available  men,  and  in  consequence 
of  almost  incessant  rains  the  roads  became  so  bad  that  it  was 
difficult  to  supply  it  with  food  and  forage.  The  troops  being 
new  and  unseasoned  to  camp  life,  suffered  much  from  sickness. 
The  service  for  them  was  hard  in  consequence  of  the  neces 
sarily  great  amount  of  scouting  required  on  the  numerous 
paths  leading  through  the  precipitous  spurs  of  the  ranges  of 
both  Rich  and  Cheat  Mountains,  which  closely  shut  in  the 
valley  of  the  Tygart's. 

The  writer  was  often  engaged  leading  scouting  parties 
through  the  mountains. 

(The  accompanying  map  will  give  some  idea  of  the  location 
of  the  troops  and  the  physical  surroundings.) 

Whole  companies  were  sometimes  posted  at  somewhat  re 
mote  and  inaccessible  places  for  observation  and  picket  duty. 

Scouts  and  spies  constantly  reported  large  accessions  to  the 
enemy.  Reynolds,  therefore,  called  loudly  for  reinforcements, 
but  only  a  few  came.  On  August  26th  five  companies  of  the 
9th  Ohio  (Bob  McCook's  German  regiment)  and  five  companies 
of  the  23d  Ohio  (Col.  E.  P.  Scammon)  reached  Camp  Elk 
Wrater.  These  companies  numbered,  present  for  duty,  about 
eight  hundred. 

The  two  regiments  later  became  famous.  Robert  L.  McCook 
and  August  Willich  were  then  of  the  9th,  and  both  afterwards 
achieved  distinction  as  soldiers. 


2o8  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

The  23d  was  originally  commanded  by  Colonel  Wm.  S. 
Rosecrans;  then  by  Colonel  E.  P.  Scammon,  who  became  a 
Brigadier-General;  then  by  Colonel  Stanley  Matthews,  who 
became  a  United  States  Senator  from  Ohio,  and  a  Justice  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States;  then  by  Colonel  Ruther 
ford  B.  Hayes,  who  became  a  Brigadier-General  and  Brevet 
Major-General,  and  distinguished  himself  in  many  battles;  he 
subsequently  became  a  Representative  in  Congress,  was  thrice 
Governor  of  Ohio,  and  then  President  of  the  United  States. 
Its  last  commander  was  Colonel  James  M.  Comly,  a  brilliant  sol 
dier,  who,  after  the  war,  became  a  distinguished  journalist,  and 
later  honorably  represented  his  country  as  Minister  at  Hono 
lulu,  Hawaiian  Islands.  Lieutenant  Robert  P.  Kennedy  was 
of  this  regiment,  and  not  only  became  a  Captain  and  Assistant 
Adjutant-General,  but  was  brevetted  a  Brigadier-General,  and 
since  the  war  has  been  Lieutenant-Governor  of  Ohio  and  four 
years  in  Congress.  Wm.  McKinley  was  also  of  this  regiment, 
serving  as  a  private,  Commissary  Sergeant,  became  a  Second 
and  First  Lieutenant,  then  a  Captain  and  Brevet  Major,  and, 
since  the  war,  has  served  four  terms  as  Representative  in 
Congress,  has  been  twice  Governor  of  Ohio,  and  (as  I  write) 
the  indications  are  that  he  will  be  nominated  in  June,  1896, 
for  President,  with  a  certainty  of  election  the  following 
November.1 

On  August  14,  1861,  while  Captain  Henry  E.  Cunard,  of  the 
3d  Ohio,  with  part  of  his  company,  was  on  an  advanced  picket 
on  the  Brady's  Gate  road,  privates  Vincent  and  Watson,  under 
Corporal  Stiner,  discovered  a  man  stealthily  passing  around 
them  through  the  woods,  whom  they  halted  and  proceeded  to 
interrogate. 

"  He  professed  to  be  a  farm  hand  ;  said  his  employer  had  a 
mountain  farm  not  far  away,  where  he  pastured  cattle  ;  that  a  two 
year-old  steer  had  strayed  away,  and  he  was  looking  for  him.  His 
clothes  were  fearfully  torn  by  brush  and  briars.  His  hands  and 
face  were  scratched  by  thorns.  He  had  taken  off  his  boots  to 

1  This  prediction  has  been  fulfilled.  Major  Wm.  McKinley  was  inaugurated 
President  of  the  United  States  March  4,  1897. 


Cheat  Mountain  and  Repulse  of  Lee       209 

relieve  his  swollen  feet,  and  was  carrying  them  in  his  hands.  Imitat 
ing  the  language  and  manners  of  an  uneducated  West  Virginian,  he 
asked  the  sentinel  if  he  *  had  seed  anything  of  a  red  steer.'  The 
sentinel  had  not.  Afte»  continuing  the  conversation  for  a  time  he 
finally  said  :  '  Well,  I  must  be  a-going,  it  is  a-gettin'  late  and  I  'm 
durned  feared  I  won't  get  £>ack  to  the  farm  afore  night.  Good- 
day.'  '  Hold  on,'  said  the  sentinel  ;  *  better  go  and  see  the  Captain.' 
*  O,  no,  don't  want  to  trouble  him,  it  is  not  likely  he  has  seed  the 
steer,  and  it  's  a-gettin'  late.'  'Come  right  along,'  replied  the  sen 
tinel,  bringing  down  his  gun;  'the  Captain  will  not  mind  being 
troubled  ;  in  fact,  I  am  instructed  to  take  such  as  you  to  him.'  " 

The  boots  were  discovered  by  the  keen  instinct  of  the  in 
quiring  Yankee  to  be  too  neatly  made  and  elegant  for  a 
Western  Virginia  mountaineer  employed  at  twelve  dollars  a 
month  in  caring  for  cattle  in  the  hackings.  When  asked  the 
price  paid  for  the  boots,  the  answer  was  fifteen  dollars.  The 
suspect  was  a  highly  educated  gentleman,  wholly  incapable  of 
acting  his  assumed  character.  Ke  had  touched  the  higher 
education  and  civilization  of  men  of  learning,  and  his  tongue 
could  not  be  attuned  to  lie  and  deceive  in  the  guise  of  one  to 
the  manor  born.  Though  at  first  Captain  Cunard  hesitated, 
he  told  the  gentleman  he  would  take  him  for  further  examina 
tion  to  camp.  Finding  the  Captain,  in  his  almost  timid  native 
modesty,  was  nevertheless  obdurate,  the  now  prisoner,  know 
ing  hope  of  escape  was  gone,  declared  himself  to  be  Captain 
Julius  A.  De  Lagnel,  late  commander  of  the  Confederates  in 
the  battle  of  Rich  Mountain,  where  he  was  reported  killed. 
His  tell-tale  boots  were  made  in  Washington.  He  was  severely 
wounded  July  nth,  and  had  succeeded  in  reaching  a  friendly 
secluded  house  near  the  battle-field,  where  he  remained  and 
was  cared  for  until  his  wound  healed  and  he  was  able  to  travel. 
He  had  been  in  the  mountains  five  days  and  four  nights,  and 
just  as  he  was  passing  the  last  and  most  advanced  Union 
picket  he  was  taken. 

His  little  stock  of  provisions,  consisting  of  a  small  sack  of 
biscuits,  was  about  exhausted,  and  what  remained  was  spoiled. 

1  Citizen  Soldier  (Beatty),  p.  51. 

VOL.  I.— 14. 


210  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

He  was  taken  to  camp,  wet,  shivering,  and  exhausted  from 
starvation,  cold,  and  exposure.  It  is  needless  to  say  his  wants 
of  all  kinds  were  supplied  at  once  by  the  Union  officers.  After 
remaining  a  few  days  in  our  camp,  and  meeting  General  Rey 
nolds,  who  knew  him  in  the  United  States  Army,  he  was  sent 
to  join  Pegram  at  Fort  McHenry.  Both  these  officers  were 
soon  exchanged,  and  served  through  the  war,  neither  rising  to 
great  eminence.  Pegram  became  a  Major-General,  and  died, 
February  6,  1865,  of  wounds  received  at  Hatcher's  Run.  De 
Lagnel  became  a  Brigadier-General,  and  survived  the  war.  He 
had  the  misfortune  of  being  twice  captured,  as  we  have  seen,1 
once  as  a  Union  and  once  as  a  Confederate  officer;  neither 
capture,,  however,  occurred  through  any  fault  of  his. 

The  3d  Ohio  was  encamped  on  the  banks  of  Tygart's  Valley 
River,  usually  an  innocent,  pleasantly-flowing  mountain  stream, 
but,  as  it  proved,  capable  of  a  sudden  rise  to  a  dangerous 
height,  as  most  streams  are  that  are  located  so  as  to  catch  the 
waters  from  the  many  rivulets,  gulches,  and  ravines  leading 
from  the  adjacent  mountain  sides  and  spurs. 

Illustrating  the  exigencies  of  camp  life,  an  incident  is  given 
of  this  river  suddenly  rising  (August  2Oth)  so  as  to  threaten  to 
sweep  away  in  the  flood  the  3d  Ohio  hospital,  located  by 
Surgeon  McMeans  for  health  and  safety  on  a  small  island, 
ordinarily  easy  of  access.  The  hospital  tent  contained  two 
wounded  and  a  dozen  or  more  sick.  The  tents  and  inmates 
were  at  the  first  alarm  removed  to  the  highest  ground  on  the 
island  by  men  who  swam  out  thither  for  the  purpose.  By 
seven  in  the  evening,  however,  it  became  apparent  that  the 
whole  island  would  soon  be  submerged ;  and  logs,  driftwood, 
green  trees,  etc.,  were  sweeping  down  the  river  at  a  tremen 
dous  speed.  To  rescue  the  wounded,  sick,  and  attendants  at 
the  hospital  seemed  impossible.  Various  suggestions  were 
made;  a  raft  was  proposed,  but  this  was  decided  impracticable 
as,  if  made  and  launched,  it  would  in  such  a  current  be  uncon 
trollable. 

Lieutenant-Colonel  John  Beatty,  of  the  3d  Ohio,  with  that 

1  Ante,  pp.  161,  196. 


Cheat  Mountain  and  Repulse  of  Lee       211 

Scotch-Irish  will  and  heroic  determination  which  characterized 
him  in  all  things,  especially  in  fighting  the  enemy,  met  the 
emergency.  He  got  into  an  army  wagon  and  compelled  the 
teamster  to  drive  into  the  rushing  stream  above  the  island  so 
that  he  could  move,  in  part,  with  the  current.  Thus,  by 
swimming  the  horses,  he,  with  a  few  others,  escaped  the  float 
ing  timbers  and  reached  the  imperiled  hospital.  He  found  at 
once  that  it  was  impossible  to  carry  back  the  occupants  or  even 
to  return  with  the  wagon.  He  promptly  ordered  the  driver 
to  unhitch  the  horses  and  swim  them  to  shore,  and  to  return 
in  like  manner  with  two  or  three  more  wagons.  Two  more 
wagons  reached  Beatty,  but  one  team  was  carried  down  the 
stream  and  drowned.  He  placed  the  three  wagons  on  the 
highest  ground,  though  all  the  island  was  soon  overflowed, 
chained  and  tied  them  securely  together  and  to  stakes  or  trees. 
On  the  wagon  boxes  the  hospital  tent  was  rolled,  and  the  sick 
and  wounded  were  placed  thereon  with  some  of  the  hospital 
supplies.  He,  with  those  accompanying  him,  decided  to  re 
main  and  share  their  fate,  and  he,  with  some  who  could  not 
get  into  the  wagon,  climbed  into  the  trees.  The  river  at 
10  P.M.  had  reached  the  hubs  of  the  wagons  and  threatened  to 
submerge  them,  but  soon  after  it  commenced  to  recede  slowly, 
though  a  rain  again  set  in,  lasting  through  the  night.  Morning 
found  the  river  fast  resuming  its  normal  state,  and  the  Colonel 
and  his  rescuing  party,  with  the  hospital  occupants,  were  all 
brought  safely  to  the  shore. 

Two  diverting  incidents  occurred  in  the  night.  A  false  alarm 
led  to  the  long  roll  being  beaten,  the  noise  of  which,  and  of 
the  men  rapidly  assembling,  could  just  be  heard  on  the  island 
above  the  roar  of  the  water.  Francis  Union,  of  Company  A 
of  the  3d,  was  shot  in  the  dark  and  killed,  without  challenge, 
by  a  frightened  sentinel.  This  caused  the  long  roll  to  be 
beaten. 

Beatty  mentions  an  entertainment,  not  on  the  bill,  to  which 
he  and  others  were  treated  while  clinging  to  the  trees  above 
the  flood,  and  which  was  furnished  by  a  soldier  teamster  (Jake 
Smith)  who  had  swum  to  the  aid  of  the  hospital  people,  and  a 


212  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

hospital  attendant,  both  of  whom  were  so  favorably  located  as 
to  enjoy  unrestrained  access  to  the  hospital  "  commissary." 
They  both  became  intoxicated,  and  then  quarrelled  over  their 
relative  rank  and  social  standing.  The  former  insisted  upon 
the  other  addressing  him  as  Mr.  Smith,  not  as  "  Jake."  The 
Smith  family,  he  asserted,  was  not  only  numerous  but  highly 
respectable,  and,  as  one  of  its  honored  members,  no  person  of 
rank  below  a  major-general  should  take  the  liberty  of  calling 
him  "  Jake"  ;  especially  would  this  not  be  tolerated  from 
"  one  who  carried  out  pukes  and  slop-buckets  from  a  field 
hospital" — such  an  one  should  not  even  call  him  "Jacob. " 
This  disrespectful  allusion  to  his  calling  ruffled  the  temper  of 
the  hospital  attendant,  and,  growing  profane,  he  insisted  that 
he  was  as  good  as  Smith,  and  better,  and  at  once  challenged 
the  bloviating  mule  scrubber  to  get  down  off  his  perch  and 
stand  up  before  him  like  a  man."  '  Jake  "  was  unmoved  by 
this  counter-assault,  and  towards  morning,  with  a  strong  voice 
and  little  melody,  sang  1 : 

11  Ho,  gif  glass  uf  goodt  lauger  du  me, 

Du  mine  fadter,  mine  modter,  mine  vife  ; 

Der  day's  vork  vas  done,  undt  we  '11  see 
Vot  bleasures  der  vos  in  dis  life. 

"  Undt  ve  sit  us  aroundt  mit  der  table, 

Undt  ve  speak  of  der  oldt,  oldt  time, 
Ven  ve  lif  un  dot  house  mit  der  gable, 

Un  der  vine-cladt  banks  of  der  Rhine,"  etc. 

While  in  camp  at  Elk  Water  my  wife  and  three  months'  old 
son,  Joseph  Warren,  Jr.,  Hon.  William  White  (brother-in-law) 
and  his  wife  Rachel,  and  their  son,  Charles  R.  White  (then 
twelve  years  old),  visited  me  for  a  brief  experience  in  camp 
with  the  army.  They  remained  until  the  morning  of  Septem 
ber  i2th.  On  the  nth  Judge  White  accompanied  me  to 
Reynolds'  headquarters,  at  Cheat  Mountain  Pass,  and  while 
there  he  was,  by  the  General,  invited  to  visit  the  camp  on  Cheat 

1  Citizen  Soldier,  p.  60-1. 


Cheat  Mountain  and  Repulse  of  Lee       213 

Mountain  summit.  It  was  suggested  that  in  doing  so  I 
should,  with  the  Judge,  join  Lieutenant  Wm.  E.  Merrill,  of 
the  engineers,  at  Camp  Elk  Water  the  following  morning,  go 
by  the  main  road  to  the  summit,  thence  down  the  mountain 
path  via  the  Rosecrans  house  to  camp.  This  suggestion  we  were 
inclined  to  adopt,  but  on  regaining  camp  I  ascertained  that  the 
enemy  had  been  seen  nearer  our  camp  than  usual,  and  decided 
it  was  safest  for  the  visiting  party  to  depart  for  home.  They 
accordingly  bade  us  good-by  on  the  next  morning  and  pro 
ceeded  via  Huttonville,  Beverly,  Laurel  Hill,  Philippi,  Web 
ster,  and  Grafton,  safely  to  their  homes  at  Springfield,  Ohio. 

Lieutenant  Merrill,  with  a  small  escort,  departed  as  arranged, 
and  soon,  on  the  main  road,  ran  into  a  Confederate  force 
(Anderson's);  he  and  his  party  were  captured  and  carried  with 
the  retreating  Confederates  to  Valley  Mountain  camp,  thence 
to  Richmond,  where  they  remained  for  a  considerable  time  in 
Libby  Prison.  Thus  narrowly,  Judge  White 1  and  myself 
escaped  the  fate  of  Lieutenant  Merrill. 

Having  disposed  of  some  of  the  incidents  of  camp  life  and 
spoken  of  family  and  friends,  I  return  to  the  situation,  as 
stated,  of  the  opposing  forces  of  Reynolds  and  Lee. 

1  William  White  was  then  a  common  pleas  Judge  ;  in  March,  1864,  he  became  a 
Judge  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Ohio,  a  position  he  held  until  his  death.  He  was 
appointed  by  President  Arthur  and  confirmed  by  the  Senate  (March,  1883)  United 
States  District  Judge  for  the  Southern  District  of  Ohio ;  his  sudden  death 
prevented  his  qualifying  and  entering  upon  the  duties  of  the  office.  He 
was  remarkable  for  his  judicial  learning,  combined  with  simplicity  and  purity  of 
character.  Born  (January  28,  1822)  in  England,  both  parents  dying  when  he  was 
a  child,  having  no  brother  or  sister  or  very  near  relative,  poor,  and  almost  a  home 
less  waif,  he,  when  about  ten  years  of  age,  came  in  the  hold  of  a  ship  to  America. 
From  this  humble  start,  through  persevering  energy  and  varying  vicissitudes,  he, 
under  republican  institutions,  acquired  an  education,  won  friends,  became  eminent 
as  a  lawyer  and  jurist,  and  earned  the  high  esteem  of  his  fellow-men,  dying  (March 
12,  1883)  at  Springfield,  Ohio,  at  sixty  years  of  age,  having  served  as  a  common 
pleas  Judge  eight  years  and  Judge  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Ohio  nineteen  years. 

His  only  son,  Charles  Rodgers  White  (born  May  25,  1845),  also  became  a  dis 
tinguished  lawyer  and  judge,  and  died  prematurely,  July  29,  1890,  on  a  Pullman 
car  on  the  Northern  Pacific  Railroad,  near  Thompson's  Falls,  Montana,  while  re 
turning  from  Spokane  Falls,  where  he,  while  on  a  proposed  journey  to  Alaska, 
was  taken  fatally  ill. 


Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

At  this  time  Floyd  and  Wise  were  actively  operating  in  the 
Kanawha  country,  confronting  Rosecrans,  who  was  command 
ing  there  in  person,  their  special  purpose  then  being  to  prevent 
reinforcements  going  to  Reynolds,  upon  whom  the  heavy  blow 
was  to  fall ;  Lee  in  person  directing  it. 

Lee  was  accompanied  to  Valley  Mountain  by  two  aides-de 
camp,  Colonels  John  A.  Washington  and  Walter  H.  Taylor. 

General  Loring,  who  retained  the  immediate  command  on 
this  line,  had  the  1st  North  Carolina  and  2d  Tennessee,  under 
General  Donnelson ;  a  Tennessee  brigade,  under  General  An 
derson ;  the  2ist  and  426.  Virginia  and  an  Irish  Virginia  regi 
ment,  under  Colonel  Wm.  Gilham ;  a  brigade  under  Colonel 
Burke;  a  battalion  of  cavalry  under  Major  W.  H.  F.  Lee; 
three  batteries  of  artillery,  and  perhaps  other  troops.  On  the 
Staunton  pike  at  Greenbrier  River,  about  twelve  miles  in  front 
of  Kimball's  camp  on  Cheat  Mountain,  General  Jackson  had 
the  ist  and  2d  Georgia,  23d,  3ist,  37th,  and  44th  Virginia,  the 
3d  Arkansas,  and  two  battalions  of  Virginia  volunteers;  also 
two  batteries  of  artillery  and  several  companies  of  cavalry. 

Though  conscious  of  superior  strength,  Lee  sought  still 
further  to  insure  success  by  grand  strategy,  hence  he  caused 
Loring  to  issue  a  confidential  order  detailing  a  plan  of  attack, 
which  is  so  remarkable  in  its  complex  details  that  it  is  given 
here. 

"(Confidential.} 

"HEADQUARTERS,  VALLEY  MOUNTAIN, 
September  8,   1861. 

''(Special  Order  No.  2&) 

"  i.  General  H.  R.  Jackson,  commanding  Monterey  division, 
will  detach  a  column  of  not  more  than  two  thousand  men  under 
Colonel  Rust,  to  turn  the  enemy's  position  at  Cheat  Mountain  Pass 
('summit')  at  daylight  on  the  i2th  inst.  (Thursday).  General 
Jackson,  having  left  a  suitable  guard  for  his  own  position,  with  the 
rest  of  his  available  force,  will  take  post  on  the  Eastern  Ridge  of 
Cheat  Mountain,  occupy  the  enemy  in  front,  and  co-operate  in  the 
assault  of  his  attacking  column,  should  circumstances  favor.  The 


RICH  MOUNTAN 
AND  CHEAT  MOUNTAIN 

COUNTRY, 

WEST      VIRGINIA 


Pass  3.  mdes. 
HuttonviUe    to  Elk  Water  7.    mites. 
Cheat  Pass  to  Cfaat  MI  Summit  Sw/es. 

Route  cf   ffe&el  advance.. 
Trails  or  TBrtdte  Paths  =====  = 


Cheat  Mountain  and  Repulse  of  Lee       215 

march  of  Colonel  Rust  will  be  so  regulated  as  to  attain  his  position 
during  the  same  night,  and  at  the  dawn  of  the  appointed  day 
(Thursday,  i2th)  he  will,  if  possible,  surprise  the  enemy  in  his 
trenches  and  carry  them. 

"  2.  The  '  Pass  '  having  been  carried,  General  Jackson  with  his 
whole  fighting  force  will  immediately  move  forward  towards  Hut- 
tonville,  prepared  against  an  attack  from  the  enemy,  taking  every 
precaution  against  firing  upon  the  portion  of  the  army  operating 
west  of  Cheat  Mountain,  and  ready  to  co-operate  with  it  against  the 
enemy  in  Tygart's  Valley.  The  supply  wagons  of  the  advancing 
columns  will  follow,  and  the  reserve  will  occupy  Cheat  Mountain. 

u  3.  General  Anderson's  brigade  will  move  down  Tygart's  Val 
ley,  following  the  west  slope  of  Cheat  Mountain  range,  concealing 
his  movements  from  the  enemy.  On  reaching  Wymans  (or  the 
vicinity)  he  will  refresh  his  force  unobserved,  send  forward  intelli 
gent  officers  to  make  sure  his  further  course,  and  during  the  night 
of  the  nth  (Wednesday)  proceed  to  the  Staunton  turnpike,  where 
it  intersects  the  west  top  of  Cheat  Mountain,  so  as  to  arrive  there 
as  soon  after  daylight  on  the  i2th  (Thursday)  as  possible. 

"  He  will  make  disposition  to  hold  the  turnpike,  prevent  rein 
forcements  reaching  Cheat  Mountain  Pass  (summit),  cut  the  tele 
graph  wire,  and  be  prepared,  if  necessary,  to  aid  in  the  assault  of 
the  enemy's  position  on  the  middle-top  (summit)  of  Cheat  Moun 
tain,  by  General  Jackson's  division,  the  result  of  which  he  must 
await.  He  must  particularly  keep  in  mind  that  the  movement  of 
General  Jackson  is  to  surprise  the  enemy  in  their  defences.  He 
must,  therefore,  not  discover  his  movements  nor  advance — before 
Wednesday  night — beyond  a  point  where  he  can  conceal  his  force. 
Cheat  Mountain  Pass  being  carried,  he  will  turn  down  the  moun 
tain  and  press  upon  the  left  and  rear  of  the  enemy  in  Tygart's  Val 
ley,  either  by  the  new  or  old  turnpike,  or  the  Becky's  Run  road, 
according  to  circumstances. 

"  4.  General  Donnelson's  brigade  will  advance  on  the  right  of 
Tygart's  Valley  River,  seizing  the  paths  and  avenues  leading  from 
that  side  of  the  river,  and  driving  back  the  enemy  that  may  en 
deavor  to  retard  the  advance  of  the  center,  along  the  turnpike,  or 
to  turn  his  right. 

"5.  Such  of  the  artillery  as  may  not  be  used  upon  the  flanks 
will  proceed  along  the  Huntersville  turnpike,  supported  by  Major 


216  .  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

Mumford's   battalion,   followed    by  the    rest  of    Colonel    Gilham's 
brigade  in  reserve. 

"  6.  Colonel  Burke's  brigade  will  advance  on  the  left  of  Ty- 
gart's  Valley  River,  in  supporting  distance  of  the  center,  and  clear 
that  side  of  the  valley  of  the  forces  of  the  enemy  that  might  ob 
struct  the  advance  of  the  artillery. 

"  7.  The  cavalry  under  Major  Lee  will  follow,  according  to  the 
nature  of  the  ground,  in  rear  of  the  left  of  Colonel  Burke's  brigade. 
It  will  watch  the  movements  of  the  enemy  in  that  quarter,  give 
notice  of,  and  prevent  if  possible,  any  attempt  to  turn  the  left  of 
the  line,  and  be  prepared  to  strike  when  opportunity  offers. 

"  8.  The  wagons  of  each  brigade,  properly  parked  and  guarded, 
under  the  charge  of  their  respective  quartermasters — who  will  per 
sonally  superintend  their  movements — will  pursue  the  main  turn 
pike,  under  the  general  direction  of  their  chief  quartermaster,  in 
rear  of  the  army,  and  out  of  cannon-range  of  the  enemy. 

"  9.  Commanders  on  both  lines  of  operations  will  particularly 
see  that  their  corps  wear  the  distinguishing  badge,  and  that  both  of 
ficers  and  men  take  every  precaution  not  to  fire  on  our  own  troops. 
This  is  essentially  necessary,  as  the  forces  on  both  sides  of  Cheat 
Mountain  may  unite.  They  will  also  use  every  exertion  to  prevent 
noise  and  straggling  from  the  ranks,  correct  quietly  any  confusion 
that  may  occur,  and  cause  their  commands  to  rapidly  execute  their 
movement  when  in  the  presence  of  the  enemy. 

"  By  order  of  General  W.  W.  Loring. 

"  CARTER  L.  STEVENSON, 
"  Assistant  Adjutant  and  Inspector  General." 

General  Lee,  to  stimulate  his  army  to  great  effort,  himself, 
by  another  special  order  of  same  date,  exhorted  it  as  follows : 

"  The  forward  movement  announced  to  the  Army  of  the  North 
west  in  special  order  No.  28,  from  its  headquarters,  of  this  date, 
gives  the  general  commanding  the  opportunity  of  exhorting  the 
troops  to  keep  steadily  in  view  the  great  principles  for  which  they 
contend,  and  to  manifest  to  the  world  their  determination  to  main 
tain  them.  The  eyes  of  the  country  are  upon  you.  The  safety  of 
your  homes  and  the  lives  of  all  you  hold  dear  depend  upon  your 
courage  and  exertions.  Let  each  man  resolve  to  be  victorious,  and 


Cheat  Mountain  and  Repulse  of  Lee       2 1 7 

that  the  right  of  self-government,  liberty,  and  peace  shall  in  him 
find  a  defender.      The  progress  of  this  army  must  be  forward." 

The  column  from  Greenbrier  under  Colonel  Albert  Rust,  of 
Arkansas,  was  given  the  initiative,  and  on  its  success  the  plan 
detailed  pivoted,  but  the  several  columns  were  expected  to  act 
at  the  same  time  and  in  concert.  Colonel  Rust's  command, 
about  2000  strong,  by  a  blind  road  to  the  Union  right  reached 
its  designated  position  between  the  Red  Bridge  and  Kimball's 
fortified  position.  Here  it  captured  an  assistant  commissary, 
and  from  him  received  such  an  exaggerated  account  of  the 
strength  of  Kimball's  camp  and  the  number  of  his  men  that, 
without  awaiting  the  columns  of  Donnelson  and  Anderson,  it 
retired  with  the  one  prisoner.  Lee's  main  army  moved  north 
from  Valley  Mountain  camp,  on  the  turnpike,  Anderson  and 
Donnelson  taking  the  designated  routes  to  the  right,  the 
former  passing  to  the  head  of  Becky's  Run,  thence  through 
the  mountains  to  a  position  on  the  road  in  the  rear  of  Cheat 
Summit  camp,  west  of  the  Red  Bridge  and  of  the  point  struck 
by  Rust,  arriving  at  daylight  of  the  I2th  of  September. 
Donnelson,  by  another  path  nearer  the  road  which  the  princi 
pal  column  under  Loring  pursued,  marched  to  Stuart's  Run, 
then  down  it  to  the  Simmons  house,  where,  on  the  nth,  it 
captured  Captain  Bense  and  about  sixty  men  of  the  6th  Ohio, 
who  were  in  an  exposed  position  and  had  not  been  vigilant. 
Donnelson  then  marched  to  Becky's  Run  and  to  a  point  where, 
from  a  nearby  elevation,  he  could  see  the  Union  camp  at  Elk 
Water,  and  he  was  to  the  eastward  of  it  and  partially  in  its 
rear.  Here,  with  his  command,  he  remained  for  the  night. 
General  Lee  followed  and  joined  Donnelson  in  the  early  morn 
ing  of  the  1 2th,  and  together  they  advanced  to  Andrew  Crouch's 
house,  within  a  mile  of  Elk  Water  camp  and  fairly  in  its  rear. 
Lee,  however,  ordered  Donnelson  to  retire  his  column  to 
Becky's  Run  at  the  Rosecrans  house.  Neither  Rust,  Ander 
son,  nor  Donnelson,  though  each  led  a  column  into  the  region 
between  the  Elk  Water  and  Cheat  Mountain  camps  (distant 

1  War  Records,  vol.  v.,  p.  192. 


218  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

apart  through  the  mountains  about  six  miles)  seemed,  at  the 
critical  time,  to  know  where  the  others  were,  or  what  they 
were  doing.  The  presence  of  Lee  with  Donnelson  on  the 
morning  of  the  I2th  did  not  materially  improve  the  conditions 
in  this  respect.  Donnelson,  before  Lee's  arrival,  contemplated 
an  attack  on  a  body  of  what  he  supposed  a  thousand  men  (the 
detachments  of  the  9th  and  23d  Ohio)  camped  in  rear  of  the 
main  Union  camp  and  near  Jacob  Crouch's  house.  Colonel 
Savage  of  the  i6th  Tennessee  advised  against  the  attempt, 
and  Lee,  on  his  arrival,  must  have  regarded  it  as  too  hazard 
ous.  Lee  wrote  Governor  Letcher  five  days  later  that  "  it  was 
a  tempting  sight  "  to  see  our  tents  on  Valley  River. 

Loring,  with  the  principal  command,  accompanied  by  all  the 
artillery,  forced  the  Union  pickets  back  to  the  mouth  of  Elk 
Water,  where  he  encountered  resistance  from  a  strong  grand- 
guard  and  the  pickets.  Here  some  shots  both  of  infantry  and 
artillery  were  exchanged,  but  with  little  result. 

It  is  due  to  the  truth  of  history  to  say  that  none  of  the 
movements  of  Lee's  army  were  known  or  anticipated  by 
Reynolds  or  his  officers,  and  whatever  was  done  to  prevent  its 
success  was  without  previous  plan  or  method.  As  late  as  the 
evening  of  the  nth,  Reynolds  was  still  with  his  headquarters 
at  Cheat  Mountain  Pass,  six  miles  distant  by  the  nearest 
route  from  either  camp.  On  this  day  Captain  Bense  was  sur 
prised  and  his  entire  company  taken  where  posted  some  three 
miles  from  Camp  Elk  Water,  but  this  capture  was  not  known 
until  the  next  day.  The  proximity  of  Donnelson's  command 
to  this  camp  was  also  unknown  until  after  it  had  withdrawn, 
and  Rust's  and  Anderson's  presence  on  the  Staunton  pike  in 
rear  of  Cheat  Summit  camp  was  likewise  unknown  both  to 
Reynolds  and  Kimball  until  about  the  time  they  commenced 
to  retreat.  True,  on  the  I2th,  the  presence  of  some  force  in 
the  mountains  between  the  Union  camps  became  known. 
Lieutenant  Merrill  and  his  party  departed  from  the  valley  to 
the  mountain  summit  on  the  morning  of  the  I2th  entirely 
ignorant  of  any  movement  of  the  enemy.  But  both  Reynolds 
and  Kimball  acted,  under  the  circumstances,  with  energy  and 


Cheat  Mountain  and  Repulse  of  Lee       219 

intelligence.  General  Reynolds  moved  his  headquarters  to 
Camp  Elk  Water,  the  better  to  direct  affairs.  On  the  morn 
ing  of  the  I2th  of  September  Kimball  started  a  train  of  wagons 
from  his  camp  to  the  pass,  for  the  usual  supplies,  and  it  was 
attacked  by  Rust's  command  before  it  had  proceeded  a  mile. 
This  attack  was  reported  to  Kimball,  who  supposed  it  was 
made  by  a  small  scouting  party,  but  on  going  to  the  scene  of 
it  with  portions  of  the  25th  Ohio,  under  Colonel  Jones,  24th 
Ohio,  under  Lieutenant-Colonel  Gilbert,  and  Captains  Brooks 
and  Williamson's  companies  of  the  I4th  Indiana,  a  body  of  the 
enemy  supposed  to  number  2500  was  encountered.  Kimball, 
supposing  serious  work  was  at  hand,  ordered  the  position  held 
until  further  dispositions  could  be  made  to  meet  the  danger. 
A  sharp  skirmish  ensued,  which  ended  in  Rust's  troops  pre 
cipitately  retreating  from  their  position  on  the  road  under 
cover  of  the  timber,  and  becoming  so  demoralized  that  they 
threw  away  "  guns,  clothing,  and  everything  that  impeded 
their  progress." 

Rust's  command  continued  its  retreat  through  the  moun 
tains,  and  at  10  P.M.  of  the  I3th  Rust  dispatched  General 
Loring  that  "  The  expedition  against  Cheat  Mountain  failed." 
He  indulged  in  some  criticism  on  his  men,  denouncing  some 
("  not  Arkansians  ")  as  cowards.  At  the  same  time  General 
Jackson  reported  to  Loring  that  he  was  in  possession  of  the 
first  summit  of  Cheat  Mountain  in  front  of  Kimball's  position, 
but  only  holding  it  until  he  should  receive  orders,  meanwhile 
hoping  something  would  be  done  in  Tygart's  Valley.  He, 
however,  did  nothing  more,  and  soon  withdrew  to  his  former 
camp.2 

Captain  Coons  of  the  I4th  Indiana  was  sent  on  the  evening 
of  the  1 8th  from  Cheat  Mountain  summit  with  60  men  of  the 
1 4th  Indiana,  24th  and  25th  Ohio,  on  a  path  leading  to  Elk 
Water  camp,  with  instruction  to  take  position  at  the  Rosecrans 
house  on  Becky's  Run.  Kimball,  on  the  I2th,  sent  90  men 
under  Captain  David  J.  Higgins,  of  the  24th  Ohio,  to  relieve 

1  Kimball's  Report,    War  Records,  vol.  v.,  p.  186. 

2  Rust's  Report,    War  Records,  vol.  v.,  p.  191. 


220  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

Captain  Coons.  In  going  thither,  when  about  two  miles  from 
where  Colonel  Rust  was  attacked,  Higgins  ran  unexpectedly 
into  Colonel  Anderson's  column  from  Valley  Mountain,  and 
engaged  it  with  great  spirit.  The  enemy  was  thrown  into 
some  confusion  by  this  unexpected  encounter,  but  the  loss  on 
either  side  was  slight,  and  when  Major  Wm.  Harrow  of  In 
diana  arrived  from  Kimball's  camp  with  two  more  companies, 
and  ascertained  that  Anderson  had  a  brigade  in  the  vicinity, 
he  ordered  the  Union  troops  withdrawn  to  within  about  one 
mile  of  camp. 

Captain  Coons,  owing  to  a  heavy  rain,  darkness,  and  the 
difficulty  in  following  the  mountain  path,  did  not  reach  the 
Rosecrans  house  until  after  daybreak  of  the  I2th.  He  passed 
to  the  rear  of  Anderson's  brigade  as  it  marched  to  the  pike  in 
rear  of  Cheat  Mountain  camp.  When  Captain  Coons  reached 
the  Rosecrans  house  he  found  evidence  of  troops  having  been 
there  recently,  and  soon  discovered  smoke  and  heard  the  snap 
ping  of  caps  on  a  mountain  spur  towards  Elk  Water  camp. 
He  concluded,  however,  that  he  was  near  a  Union  picket 
post  from  that  camp,  and  sent  forward  five  men  to  ascertain 
who  his  neighbors  were.  As  these  men  ascended  the  moun 
tain  they  were  fired  on  and  three  were  shot  down,  two  killed, 
and  the  others  captured.  They  were  not  challenged.  This 
was  Donnelson's  command,  General  Lee  and  his  aide,  Colonel 
Taylor,  being  then  with  it.  Colonel  Savage  of  Tennessee 
commanded  the  troops  first  encountered.  The  Confederates 
advanced,  firing  wildly.  Captain  Coon's  men  returned  the 
fire  promptly,  killed  and  wounded  some,  and  when  they  had 
checked  the  enemy  retired  to  higher  ground  to  the  eastward 
and  took  position  behind  fallen  timber.  As  the  enemy  ap 
proached  across  the  narrow  valley,  Coons  made  a  most  gallant 
resistance  and  drove  back  the  large  force  attacking  him,  but 
feeling  his  complete  isolation,  he  finally  retired  by  a  trail 
towards  the  pike.  He  had  not  gone  far,  however,  until  he  ran 
into  a  bunch  of  the  enemy  consisting  of  surgeons,  quarter 
masters,  and  negroes,  who,  on  being  fired  into,  fled  to  a  main 
force  nearer  the  pike.  This  was  Anderson's  column,  and 


Cheat  Mountain  and  Repulse  of  Lee       221 

about  the  time  when  Major  Harrow  and  Captain  Higgins* 
men  were  firing  on  it  from  the  other  side. 

Thus  the  several  bodies  of  the  enemy,  without  special  de 
sign,  seemed  to  be  seriously  attacked  from  many  directions 
and  became  dismayed.  Captain  Coons  withdrew  safely,  and 
later  found  his  way  to  camp. 

Rust  had  failed,  and  the  two  other  columns  having  become 
entangled  in  the  mountains,  and  not  knowing  how  soon  they 
would  again  be  assailed,  beat  a  disorderly  retreat,  and,  like 
Rust's  men,  threw  away  overcoats,  knapsacks,  haversacks, 
and  guns.  Lee  says  he  ordered  a  retreat  because  the  men 
were  short  of  provisions,  as  well  as  on  account  of  Rust's  fail 
ure.  Had  Captain  Coons  reached  his  destination  a  few  hours 
earlier  he  would  probably  have  captured  Lee  and  his  escort 
of  ten  men,  who,  in  the  previous  night,  having  lost  their  way, 
had  to  remain  unprotected  near  the  Rosecrans  house  until 
daybreak.  But  few  prisoners  were  taken  on  either  side.  The 
columns  of  Anderson  and  Donnelson,  broken,  disheartened, 
and  disorganized,  reached  Loring  in  the  Valley.  There  was 
then  and  since  much  contention  among  Confederate  officers  as 
to  the  causes  of  this  humiliating  failure. 

On  the  morning  of  the  I3th,  at  3  A.M.,  Reynolds  dispatched 
Sullivan  from  the  Pass  by  the  main  road,  and  Colonels  Mar 
row  and  Moss  with  parts  of  the  3d  Ohio  and  2d  Virginia 
(Union)  from  Elk  Water  camp,  by  the  path  leading  past  the 
Rosecrans  house,  to  cut  their  way  to  Cheat  Mountain  summit, 
but  these  columns  encountered  no  enemy,  and  only  found  the 
debris  of  the  three  retreating  bodies.  The  real  glory  of  the 
fighting  in  the  mountains  belonged  to  the  intrepid  Captain 
Coons,  who  afterwards  became  Colonel  of  his  regiment  and 
fell  in  the  battle  of  the  Wilderness. 

Both  Lee  and  Loring,  deeply  chagrined,  were  reluctant  to 
give  up  a  campaign  so  hopefully  commenced  and  so  compre 
hensively  planned,  but  thus  far  so  ingloriously  executed. 

They  decided  to  look  for  a  position  on  Reynolds'  right  from 
which  an  attack  could  be  made  on  Elk  Water  camp  in  con 
junction  with  a  front  attack,  and  accordingly  Colonel  John  A. 


222  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

Washington,  escorted  by  Major  W.  H.  F.  Lee  (son  of  General 
Lee)  with  his  cavalry  command,  was  dispatched  to  ascertain 
the  character  of  the  country  in  that  direction. 

Early  on  the  I2th  of  September  I  was  sent  with  a  detach 
ment  of  four  companies  of  the  3d  Ohio,  as  grand-guard  at  an 
outpost  and  for  picket  duty  as  well  as  scouting,  to  the  point 
of  a  spur  of  Rich  Mountain  near  the  mouth  and  to  the  north 
of  Elk  Water,  west  of  the  Huntersville  pike,  and  about  one 
mile  and  a  half  in  advance  of  the  camp.  This  position  covered 
the  Elk  Water  road  from  Brady's  Gate,  the  pike,  the  there 
narrow  valley  of  the  Tygart's,  and  afforded  a  good  point  of 
observation  up  the  valley  towards  the  enemy.  A  portion  of 
the  time  I  had  under  me  a  section  of  artillery  and  other  de 
tachments.  Here  Reynolds  determined  to  first  stubbornly 
resist  the  approach  of  the  enemy,  and  consequently  I  was 
ordered  to  construct  temporary  works.  Another  detachment 
was  located  east  of  the  river  with  like  instructions.  On  the 
1 2th  the  enemy  pushed  back  our  skirmishers  and  pickets  in 
the  valley  and  displayed  considerable  disposition  to  fight,  but 
as  we  exchanged  some  shots  and  showed  our  willingness  to 
give  battle,  no  real  attack  was  made.  We  noticed  that  each 
Confederate  officer  and  soldier  had  a  white  patch  on  his  cap  or 
hat.  This,  as  we  knew  later,  was  in  accordance  with  Loring's 
order,  to  avoid  danger  of  being  fired  upon  by  friends.  From 
the  badge,  however,  we  argued  that  raiding  parties  were 
abroad. 

In  the  night  of  the  I2th  Loring,  during  a  rain  and  under 
cover  of  darkness,  sent  a  small  body  to  the  rear  of  my  posi 
tion,  and  thus  having  gained  a  position  on  the  spur  of  the 
mountain  behind  and  above  us,  attempted  by  surprise  to  drive 
us  out  or  capture  us;  but  the  attack  was  feebly  made  and  a 
spirited  return  fire  and  a  charge  scattered  the  whole  force. 

Colonel  Washington,  on  the  I3th,  in  endeavoring  to  get  on 
our  right  came  into  Elk  Water  Valley  via  Brady's  Gate,  and 
descended  it  with  Major  Lee's  cavalry  as  escort.  A  report 
came  to  me  of  cavalry  approaching,  but  knowing  the  road  ran 
through  a  narrow  gorge  and  much  of  the  way  in  the  bed  of  the 


Cheat  Mountain  and  Repulse  of  Lee       223 

stream,  little  danger  was  apprehended,  especially  as  the  road 
led  directly  to  my  position.  A  few  troops  of  an  Indiana 
regiment  then  on  picket  duty  were,  however,  sent  up  the 
Elk  Water  road  a  short  distance,  and  a  company  of  the  3d 
Ohio  was  dispatched  by  me  along  the  mountain  range  skirting 
the  ravine  and  road,  with  instructions  to  gain  the  rear  of  the 
approaching  cavalry  if  possible. 

Washington  was  too  eager  to  give  time  for  such  dispositions 
to  be  carried  out;  he  soon  galloped  around  a  curve  and  came 
close  upon  the  pickets,  Major  Lee  accompanying  him.  Ser 
geant  Weiler  and  three  or  four  others  fired  upon  them  as  they 
turned  their  horses  to  fly.  Three  balls  passed  through  Wash 
ington's  body  near  together,  coming  out  from  his  breast.  He 
fell  mortally  wounded.  Major  Lee  was  unhurt,  though  his 
horse  was  shot.  Lee  escaped  on  foot  for  a  short  distance  and 
then  by  mounting  Washington's  horse.1 

When  reached,  Colonel  Washington  was  struggling  to  rise 
on  his  elbow,  and,  though  gasping  and  dying,  he  muttered, 
"  Wafer/'  but  when  it  was  brought  to  his  lips  from  the  nearby 
stream  he  was  dead.  His  body  was  carried  to  my  outpost 
headquarters,  thence  later  by  ambulance  to  Reynolds'  head 
quarters  at  camp.  Washington's  name  or  initials  were  on  his 
gauntlet  cuffs  and  upon  a  napkin  in  his  haversack ;  these  served 
to  identify  him.  He  was  richly  dressed  for  a  soldier,  and  for 
weapons  had  heavy  pistols  and  a  large  knife  in  his  belt.  He 
also  had  a  powder-flask,  field-glass,  gold-plated  spurs,  gold 
watch  and  fob-chain,  letters,  a  map  of  the  country,  and  some 
small  gold  coin  on  his  person.  His  sword,  tied  to  the  pommel 
of  his  saddle,  was  carried  off  by  his  horse. 

1  \V.  H.  F.  Lee  served  through  the  war  ;  was  wounded  and  captured  at  Brandy 
Station,  1863  ;  chiefly  commanded  cavalry  ;  became  a  Major-General  and  was  sur 
rendered  at  Appomattox.  He,  later,  became  a  farmer  at  White  House,  Virginia, 
on  the  Pamunkey,  and  was  elected  to  Congress  in  1886.  His  older  brother,  George 
Washington  Custis  Lee,  a  graduate  of  West  Point,  served  with  distinction  through 
the  war  ;  also  became  a  Confederate  Major-General,  and  was  captured  by  my  com 
mand  at  the  battle  of  Sailor's  Creek,  April  6,  1865.  Robert  E.  Lee,  Jr.,  General 
Lee's  other  son,  also  served  in  the  Confederate  army,  but  not  with  high 
rank. 


224  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

On  the  next  day  Colonel  W.  E.  Starke,  of  Louisiana,1  ap 
peared  in  front  of  my  position  bearing  a  flag  of  truce,  and  a 
letter  addressed  to  the  commanding  officer  of  the  United 
States  troops,  reading: 

"  Lt.  Col.  John  A.  Washington,  my  aide-de-camp,  whilst  riding 
yesterday  with  a  small  escort,  was  fired  upon  by  your  pickets,  and  I 
fear  killed.  Should  such  be  the  case,  I  request  that  you  shall  de 
liver  to  me  his  dead  body,  or  should  he  be  a  prisoner  in  your  hands, 
that  I  be  informed  of  his  condition. 

"  I  have  the  honor  to  be  your  obedient  servant, 
"R.  E.  LEE, 

u  General  Commanding." 

Colonel  Milo  S.  Hascall  of  the  i/th  Indiana  conveyed 
Washington's  body,  on  the  I4th,  by  ambulance,  to  Lee's  line, 
and  there  delivered  it  to  Major  Lee. 

One  of  Colonel  Washington's  pistols  was  sent  by  Reynolds 
to  Secretary  of  War  Simon  Cameron ;  the  Secretary  directed 
the  other  one  to  be  presented  to  Sergeant  John  J.  Weiler,  the 
knife  to  Corporal  Birney,  and  the  gauntlets  to  private  John 
son,  all  soldiers  of  the  i/th  Indiana.  General  Reynolds  re 
tained  the  field-glass,  but  subsequently  gave  it  to  Colonel 
Washington's  son  George.  Hascall  took  possession  of  the 
spurs  and  powder-flask,  and  Captain  George  L.  Rose,  of  Rey 
nolds'  staff,  retained  one  or  more  letters  (now  in  possession 
of  his  son,  Rev.  John  T.  Rose),  through  which  one  or  more 
of  the  fatal  bullets  passed. 

Colonel  Washington  was  buried  on  his  plantation,  '*  Wave- 
land,"  near  Marshall,  Fauquier  County,  Virginia. 

Thus  early,  on  his  first  military  campaign,  fell  John  Augus 
tine  Washington,  born  in  Jefferson  County,  Virginia,  May  3, 
1821,  the  great-great-grandson  of  General  Washington's 
brother,  John  Augustine  Washington,  and  on  his  mother's 

1  Colonel  Starke  was,  as  a  General,  killed  at  Antietam.  His  son,  Major  Starke, 
met  me  March  26,  1865,  between  the  lines  in  front  of  Petersburg,  under  a  flag  of 
truce,  while  the  killed  of  the  previous  day  were  being  removed  or  buried.  On 
Lee's  surrender  I  found  him,  and  gave  him  his  supper  and  a  bed  for  the  night. 


Cheat  Mountain  and  Repulse  of  Lee       225 

side  a  great-grandson  of  Richard  Henry  Lee,  Virginia's  great 
Revolutionary  patriot  statesman.  He  inherited  Mount  Ver- 
non,  but  sold  it  before  the  war  to  an  association  of  patriotic 
ladies,  who  still  own  it. 

The  tragic  death  of  Colonel  Washington  was  a  fitting  close 
of  the  complex  plan  of  campaign,  which,  though  entered  upon 
under  most  favorable  circumstances,  failed  fatally  in  execution 
in  each  and  all  important  parts,  though  Generals  Lee  and 
Loring,  Colonel  Savage,  and  others  of  the  Confederate  officers 
present  with  the  troops,  had  seen  much  real  service  in  the 
Mexican  War,  and  many  of  them  were  educated  West  Point 
officers. 

Neither  Lee  nor  Loring  ever  made  an  official  report  of  the 
campaign,  and  both  for  a  time  were  under  the  shadow  of  dis 
grace  because  of  its  ineffectiveness. 

General  Lee  was  not  quite  candid  with  his  own  army  when, 
on  the  I4th  of  September,  he  announced  to  it: 

"  The  forced  reconnoissance  of  the  enemy's  positions,  both  at 
Cheat  Mountain  Pass  and  on  Valley  River,  having  been  completed, 
and  the  character  of  the  natural  approaches  and  the  nature  of  the 
artificial  defences  exposed,  the  Army  of  the  Northwest  will  resume 
its  former  position." 

In  a  private  letter,  however,  dated  Valley  Mountain,  Sep 
tember  17,  1861,  addressed  to  Governor  John  Letcher,  Lee 
speaks  of  the  failure  of  the  campaign  with  great  candor. 

"  I  was  very  sanguine  of  taking  the  enemy's  works  on  last  Thurs 
day  morning.  I  had  considered  the  subject  well.  With  great 
effort,  the  troops  intended  for  the  surprise  had  reached  their  desti 
nation,  having  travelled  twenty  miles  of  steep  rugged  mountain 
paths  ;  and  the  last  day  through  a  terrible  storm  which  lasted  all 
night,  and  in  which  they  had  to  stand  drenched  to  the  skin  in  cold 
rain.  Still  their  spirits  were  good.  When  the  morning  broke  I 
could  see  the  enemy's  tents  on  Valley  River  at  the  point  on  the 
Huttonville  road  just  below  me.  It  was  a  tempting  sight.  We 
waited  for  the  attack  on  Cheat  Mountain,  which  was  to  be  the  sig 
nal,  till  10  A.M.  The  men  were  cleaning  their  unserviceable  arms. 

VOL.  I.— 15. 


226  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

But  the  signal  did  not  come.  All  chance  for  a  surprise  was  gone. 
The  provisions  of  the  men  had  been  destroyed  the  preceding  day 
by  the  storm.  They  had  had  nothing  to  eat  that  morning,  could 
not  hold  out  another  day,  and  were  obliged  to  be  withdrawn.  The 
attack  to  come  off  from  the  east  side  failed  from  the  difficulties  in 
the  way;  the  opportunity  was  lost  and  our  plan  discovered.  It  was 
a  grievous  disappointment  to  me,  I  assure  you;  but  for  the  rain 
storm  I  have  no  doubt  it  would  have  succeeded.  This,  Governor, 
is  for  your  own  eye.  Please  do  not  speak  of  it  ;  we  must  try  again. 

"Our  greatest  loss  is  the  death  of  our  dear  friend,  Colonel  Wash 
ington.  He  and  my  son  were  reconnoitering  the  front  of  the 
•enemy.  They  came  unawares  upon  a  concealed  party,  who  fired 
upon  them  within  twenty  yards,  and  the  Colonel  fell  pierced  by 
three  shots.  My  son's  horse  received  three  shots,  but  he  escaped 
on  the  Colonel's  horse. 

"  His  zeal  for  the  cause  to  which  he  had  devoted  himself  carried 
him,  I  fear,  too  far." 

Lee,  finding  trouble  in  the  Kanawha  country,  repaired 
thither,  and  on  September  2 1st  assumed  immediate  direction 
of  the  forces  there.  A  violent  quarrel  had  just  then  arisen 
between  the  fiery  Henry  A.  Wise  and  Floyd. 

Lee,  however,  soon  returned  to  Richmond,  and  though  still 
in  favor  with  his  Governor  and  President  Davis,  his  failure  in 
Western  Virginia  brought  him  under  a  cloud  from  which  he 
did  not  emerge  until  after  he  succeeded  General  Joseph  E. 
Johnson  on  the  latter  being  wounded  while  in  command  of 
the  Confederate  Army  at  Seven  Pines  near  Richmond,  May, 
1862. 1 

The  principal  part  of  Reynolds'  command  assembled  at 
Cheat  Mountain,  and,  advancing,  attacked  Jackson  in  position 
at  Greenbrier,  October  3d,  but  was  repulsed.  Thereafter 
active  operations  ceased  in  the  Cheat  and  Rich  Mountain  and 
Tygart's  Valley  region. 

An  unimportant  and  indecisive  affair,  hardly  above  a  skir 
mish,  occurred  at  Scarey  Creek,  July  i/th,  between  a  part  of 
General  J.  D.  Cox's  command  and  forces  under  Henry  A. 

1  Manassas  to  Appomattox  (Longstreet),  p.  112. 


West  Virginia  a  State  227 

Wise;  the  capture  of  Colonels  Norton,  Woodruff,  and  De 
Villiers,  with  two  or  three  other  officers,  being  the  principal 
Union  loss.  No  decisive  advantage  was  gained  on  either  side. 
Carnifax  Ferry,  on  the  Gauley  River,  was  a  more  important 
affair.  It  was  fought,  October  10,  1861,  between  troops  led 
by  Rosecrans  and  those  under  Floyd.  Floyd  was  found 
strongly  posted,  but  was  compelled  to  precipitately  retreat 
across  the  river  and  abandon  his  stores. 

The  campaign  season  ended  with  the  Union  forces  practically 
in  possession  of  the  forty-eight  counties,  soon  to  become  the 
State  of  West  Virginia.1 

A  convention  held  at  Wheeling,  June  11,  1861,  declared 
the  State  offices  of  Virginia  vacant  by  reason  of  the  treason 
of  those  who  had  been  chosen  to  fill  them,  and  it  then  pro 
ceeded  to  form  a  regular  state  government  for  Virginia,  with 
Francis  H.  Pierpont  for  its  Governor,  maintaining  that  the 
people  loyal  to  the  Union  should  speak  for  the  whole  State. 
The  Pierpont  government  was  recognized  by  Congress.  This 
organization,  on  August  20,  1861,  adopted  an  ordinance  "  for 
the  formation  of  a  new  State  out  of  a  portion  of  the  territory 
of  this  State."  This  ordinance  was  approved  by  a  vote  of  the 
people,  and,  November  26,  1861,  a  convention  assembled  in 
Wheeling  and  framed  a  constitution  for  the  proposed  new 
State.  This  also  was  ratified,  April,  1862,  by  the  people,  18,862 
voting  for  and  514  against  it.  The  recognized  Legislature 
of  Virginia,  in  order  to  comply  with  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States,  May  13,  1862,  consented  to  the  creation  of  a 
new  State  out  of  territory  hitherto  included  in  the  State  of 
Virginia.  The  people  of  the  forty-eight  counties  having  thus 
made  the  necessary  preparation,  Congress,  December  31,  1862, 
passed  an  act  for  the  admission  of  West  Virginia  into  the 
Union,  annexing,  however,  a  condition  that  her  people  should 
first  ratify  a  substitute  for  the  Seventh  Section,  Article  Eleven 
of  her  Constitution,  providing  that  children  of  slaves  born  in 

1  West  Virginia  was  admitted  as  a  State  in  April,  1863,  with  forty-eight  counties, 
but  Congress  consented,  by  an  act  approved  March  10,  1866,  that  the  counties  of 
Berkeley  and  Jefferson  should  be  added. — Charters  and  Cons.,  Part  II.,  p.  1993. 


228  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

her  limits  after  July  4,  1863,  should  be  free;  that  slaves  who 
at  that  time  were  under  ten  years  of  age  should  be  free  at  the 
age  of  twenty-one ;  and  all  slaves  over  ten  and  under  twenty- 
one  years  of  age  should  be  free  at  the  age  of  twenty-five ;  and 
no  slave  should  be  permitted  to  come  into  the  State  for  per 
manent  residence. 

March  26,  1863,  the  slavery  emancipation  clause  was  almost 
unanimously  ratified  by  a  vote  of  the  people,  and,  April  20, 
1863,  President  Lincoln  issued  a  proclamation  declaring  that 
West  Virginia  had  complied  with  all  required  conditions  and 
was  therefore  a  State  in  the  Union. 

The  anomalous  creation  and  admission  of  this  new  State  was 
justified  only  by  the  rebellious  times  and  in  aid  of  the  loyal 
cause.  It  is  the  only  State  carved  out  of  another  or  other 
States.  It  remains  a  singular  fact  that  the  day  preceding  the 
final  Emancipation  Proclamation  of  Lincoln,  he  approved  a 
law  of  Congress  admitting  West  Virginia  as  a  slave  State 
(with  gradual  emancipation)  into  the  Union.  The  proclama 
tion  excepted  the  counties,  commonly  then  called  West  Vir 
ginia,  from  its  application. 

The  fruit  of  the  successful  occupancy  of  Western  Virginia 
in  1861  by  the  Union  Army  and  the  consequent  failures  there 
in  the  same  year  of  the  Confederate  leaders,  Lee,  Floyd, 
Wise,  and  others,  was  the  formation  of  a  new  State,  thence 
forth  loyal  to  the  flag  and  the  Constitution. 

We  now  dismiss  West  Virginia,  where  we  first  learned  some 
thing  of  war,  but  in  time  shall  return  to  it  again.  I  have  in 
this  chapter  dealt  more  largely  in  detail  than  I  intend  to  do  in 
those  to  follow,  as  the  reader,  if  even  inexperienced  in  war, 
will  have  by  this  time  learned  sufficient  to  enable  him  to  com 
prehend  much  belonging  to  a  great  military  campaign  which 
is  often  difficult  and  sometimes  impossible  to  narrate. 


CHAPTER  V 

UNION  OCCUPANCY  OF  KENTUCKY— AFFAIR  AT  GREEN  RIVER 
—DEFEAT  OF  HUMPHREY  MARSHALL — BATTLES  OF  MILL 
SPRINGS,  FORTS  HENRY  AND  DONELSON — CAPTURE  OF 
BOWLING  GREEN  AND  NASHVILLE,  AND  OTHER  MATTERS 

THE  State  of  Kentucky,  with  its  disloyal  Governor  (Ma- 
goffin),  also  other  state  officers,  was  early  a  source  of 
much  perplexity  and  anxiety  at  Washington. 

The  State  did  not  secede,  but  her  authorities  assumed  a 
position  of  neutrality  by  which  they  demanded  that  no  Union 
troops  should  occupy  the  State,  and  for  a  time  also  pretended 
no  Confederates  should  invade  the  State. 

It  was  supposed  that  if  Union  forces  went  into  Kentucky 
her  people  would  rise  in  mass  to  expel  them.  This  delusion 
was  kept  up  until  it  was  found  her  Legislature  was  loyal  to 
the  Union  and  civil  war  was  imminent  in  the  State,  when,  in 
September,  1861,  both  Union  and  Confederate  armed  forces 
entered  the  State. 

General  Robert  Anderson  was  (August  15,  1861)  assigned 
to  the  command  of  the  Department  of  the  Cumberland,  con 
sisting  of  the  States  of  Kentucky  and  Tennessee. 

Bowling  Green  was  occupied,  September  i8th,  by  General 
Simon  Bolivar  Buckner,  a  native  Kentuckian,  formerly  of  the 
regular  army.  It  had  been  confidently  hoped  he  would  join 
the  Union  cause.  President  Lincoln,  August  i/th,  for  reasons 
not  given,  ordered  a  commission  made  out  for  him  as  Brigadier- 
General  of  Volunteers,  and  placed  in  General  Anderson's  hands 
to  be  delivered  at  his  discretion.1 

1  War  Records,  vol.  iii.,  pp.  255,  442. 

220 


230  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

Buckner  decided  to  espouse  the  Confederate  cause  while 
still  acting  as  Adjutant-General  of  the  State  of  Kentucky. 
The  commission,  presumably,  was  never  tendered  to  him. 

Changes  of  Union  commanders  were  taking  place  in  the  West 
with  such  frequency  as  to  alarm  the  loyal  people  and  shake 
their  faith  in  early  success. 

Brigadier-General  W.  S.  Harney,  in  command  of  the  De 
partment  of  the  West,  with  headquarters  at  St.  Louis  when  the 
war  broke  out,  was  relieved,  and,  on  May  31,  1861,  Nathaniel 
Lyon,  but  recently  appointed  a  Brigadier-General  of  Volun 
teers,  succeeded  him.  Lyon  lost  his  life,  August  loth,  while 
gallantly  leading  his  forces  at  Wilson's  Creek  against  superior 
numbers  under  General  Sterling  Price.  General  John  C. 
Fremont  assumed  command  of  the  Western  Department, 
July  25th,  with  headquarters  at  St.  Louis.  He  was  the  first 
to  proclaim  martial  law.  This  he  did  for  the  city  and  county 
of  St.  Louis,  August  14,  1861.' 

He  followed  this  (August  3Oth)  with  an  emancipation  proc 
lamation,  undertaking  to  free  the  slaves  of  all  persons  in  the 
State  of  Missouri  who  took  up  arms  against  the  United  States 
or  who  took  an  active  part  with  their  enemies  in  the  field ;  the 
other  property  of  all  such  persons  also  to  be  confiscated.  The 
same  proclamation  ordered  all  disloyal  persons  taken  within 
his  lines  with  arms  in  their  hands  to  be  tried  by  court-martial, 
and  if  found  guilty,  shot.2 

President  Lincoln  disapproved  this  proclamation  in  the  main. 
He  ordered  Fremont,  by  letter  dated  September  2d,  to  allow 
no  man  to  be  shot  without  his  consent,  and  requested  him  to 
modify  the  clause  relating  to  confiscation  and  emancipation  of 
slaves  so  as  to  conform  to  an  act  of  Congress  limiting  confisca 
tion  to  "property  used  for  insurrectionary  purposes." 

Lincoln  assigned  as  a  reason  for  this  request  that  such  con 
fiscation  and  liberation  of  slaves  "  would  alarm  our  Southern 
Union  friends  and  turn  them  against  us ;  perhaps  rum  our 
rather  fair  prospect  for  Kentucky."  Fremont  declining  to 

1  War  Records,  vol.  iii.,  pp.  255,  442. 
*  Ibid.,  pp.  466,  469,  485,  553,  567. 


Battle  of  Belmont — Sherman  Mentioned  231 

modify  his  proclamation,  Lincoln,  September  nth,  ordered  it 
done  as  stated.1 

But  as  matters  did  not  progress  satisfactorily  in  Fremont's 
Department,  he  was  relieved  by  General  David  Hunter,  Octo 
ber  24th,  who  was  in  turn  relieved  by  General  H.  W.  Halleck, 
November  2,  I86I.1 

Brigadier-General  U.  S.  Grant,  September  i,  1861,  assumed 
command  of  the  troops  in  the  District  of  Southeast  Missouri, 
headquarters  Cairo,  Illinois.2 

The  most  notable  event  of  1861,  in  Grant's  district,  was  the 
spirited  battle  of  Belmont,  fought  November  /th,  a  short  dis 
tance  below  Cairo.  Grant  commanded  in  person,  and  was 
successful  until  the  Confederates  were  largely  reinforced,  when 
he  was  obliged  to  retire,  which  he  did  in  good  order. 

The  Confederates  were  led  in  three  columns  by  Gen 
erals  Leonidas  Polk,  Gideon  J.  Pillow,  and  Benjamin  F. 
Cheatham. 

The  event,  really  quite  devoid  of  substantial  results  to  either 
side,  save  to  prove  the  valor  of  the  troops,  was  the  subject  of 
a  congratulatory  order  by  Grant,  in  which  he  states  he  was  in 
"  all  the  battles  fought  in  Mexico  by  Generals  Scott  and  Tay 
lor,  save  Buena  Vista,  and  he  never  saw  one  more  hotly  con 
tested  or  where  troops  behaved  with  more  gallantry."  2  The 
Confederate  Congress  voted  its  thanks  to  the  Confederate 
commanders  and  their  troops  for  their  "  desperate  courage," 
by  which  disaster  was  converted  into  victory.2 

General  Robert  Anderson  was  relieved,  October  6,  1861, 
and  General  W.  T.  Sherman  was  assigned  to  command  the 
Department  of  the  Cumberland.3 

Sherman  personally  informed  Secretary  of  War  Cameron 
and  Adjutant-General  Lorenzo  Thomas  (October  i6th)  that 
the  force  necessary  in  his  Department  was  200,000  men.3  This 
was  regarded  as  so  wild  an  estimate  that  he  was  suspected  of 
being  crazy,  and  he  was  relieved  from  his  Department 

1   War  Records,  vol.  iii.,  pp.  466,  469,  485,  553,  567. 

*  Ibid.,  pp.  144,  274,  312. 

3 Ibid.,  vol.  iv.,  pp.  296-7,  300,  314  and  333,  341. 


232  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

November  13th.1  Thereafter,  for  a  time,  he  was  under  a  cloud  in 
consequence  of  his  estimate  of  the  number  of  troops  required 
to  insure  success  in  a  campaign  through  Kentucky  and  Ten 
nessee.  We  next  hear  of  him  prominently  in  command  of  a 
division  under  Grant  at  Shiloh. 

As  the  war  progressed  his  conception  of  the  requirements  of 
the  war  was  more  than  vindicated,  and  he  became  later  the 
successful  commander  of  more  than  two  hundred  thousand 
men.2 

Brigadier-General  Don  Carlos  Buell  relieved  Sherman  of 
the  command  of  the  Department  of  the  Cumberland,  and  was 
assigned  (November  Qth)  to  the  Department  of  Ohio,  a  new 
one,  consisting  of  the  States  of  Ohio,  Michigan,  Indiana,  that 
part  of  Kentucky  east  of  the  Cumberland  River,  and  Tennes 
see,  headquarters,  Louisville.3 

The  War  Department  ordered  from  the  commands  of  Gen 
erals  Cox  and  Reynolds  in  Western  Virginia  certain  of  the 
Ohio  and  Indiana  regiments,  and  this  order  caused  the  3d 
Ohio,  with  others,  to  counter-march  over  November  roads  via 

1  War  Records,  vol.  v.,  p.  570. 

2  Sherman  was,  in  January,  1861,  Superintendent  of  the  Military  Academy  at 
Alexandria,  Louisiana,  over  the  door  of  which,  chiselled  in  marble,  was  its  motto  : 
"  By  the  liberality  of  the  General  Government  of  the  United  States.      The  Union — 
Esto  perpetua" 

As  early  as  January  gth,  an  expedition  of  five  hundred  New  Orleans  militia 
under  Colonel  Wheat,  accompanied  by  General  Braxton  Bragg,  went  by  boat  to 
Baton  Rouge  and  captured  the  United  States  arsenal  with  a  large  amount  of  arms 
and  ammunition.  The  Confederates  sent  two  thousand  muskets,  three  hundred 
Ja'ger  rifles  and  a  quantity  of  ammunition  to  Sherman  at  Alexandria,  to  be  by  him 
received  and  accounted  for.  Finding  himself  required  to  become  the  custodian  of 
stolen  military  supplies  from  the  United  States,  and  having  the  prescience  to  know 
that  war  was  inevitable,  he,  January  18,  1861,  resigned  his  position,  settled  his 
accounts  with  the  State,  and  took  his  departure  North. 

Later  we  find  him  in  St.  Louis,  President  of  the  Fifth  Street  Railroad,  and 
when,  May  loth,  the  rebels  at  Camp  Jackson  were  surrounded  and  captured,  he, 
with  his  young  son,  "Willie" — now  Father  Sherman,  and  high  in  the  Catholic 
Church — were  on-lookers  and  in  danger  of  losing  their  lives  when  the  troops,  re 
turning  from  the  camp,  were  assailed  and  aggravated  to  fire  upon  the  mob,  killing 
friend  and  foe  alike.  Sherman  fled  with  his  boy  to  a  gulley,  which  covered  them 
until  firing  ceased. — Sherman's  ^Memoirs,  vol.  i.,  pp.  155,  174. 

3  War  Records,  vol.  iv.,  pp.  349,  358. 


GENERAL    WILLIAM   T.    SHERMAN,   U.  S.  A. 
(From   a  photograph   taken  2881.) 


Terry  Killed  233 

Huttonville,  Beverly,  Rich  Mountain,  and  Buchannon  to 
Clarksburg,  from  whence  they  were  moved  by  rail  to  Parkers- 
burg,  thence  by  steamboat  to  Louisville.  By  November  3Oth, 
the  3d  was  encamped  five  miles  south  of  the  city  on  the 
Seventh  Street  plank  road,  and  soon  became  part  of  the  Sev 
enteenth  Brigade,  Colonel  Ebenezer  Dumont  commanding, 
and  (December  5th  ')  of  the  Third  Division,  commanded  by 
General  O.  M.  Mitchel,  both  highly  intelligent  officers,  active, 
affable,  and  zealous;  the  latter  untried  in  battle. 

Mitchel's  division  moved  via  Elizabethtown  to  Bacon  Creek, 
where  it  went  into  camp  for  the  winter,  December  17,  1861. 

McCook's  division  was  advanced  about  six  miles  to  Munford- 
ville  on  Green  River,  and  General  George  H.  Thomas'  division 
was  ordered  to  Liberty,  where  he  would  be  nearer  the  main 
army,  and  later  his  headquarters  were  at  Lebanon,  and  his 
division,  consisting  of  four  brigades  and  some  unattached 
cavalry  and  three  batteries  of  artillery,  was  posted  there  and 
at  Somerset  and  London.2 

December  i/th,  four  companies  of  the  32d  Indiana  (Ger 
man),  under  Lieutenant-Colonel  Von  Treba,  from  McCook's 
command,  on  outpost  duty  at  Rowlett's  Station,  south  of 
Green  River,  were  assailed  by  two  infantry  regiments,  one  of 
cavalry — Texas  Rangers — and  a  battery  of  artillery.  The  gal 
lantry  and  superiority  of  the  drill  of  these  companies  enabled 
them  to  drive  back  the  large  force  and  hold  their  position  until 
other  companies  of  the  regiment  arrived,  when  the  enemy  was 
forced  to  a  hasty  retreat,  both  sides  suffering  considerable  loss. 
Colonel  B.  F.  Terry  3  of  the  Texas  Rangers  forced  his  men  to 

1  The  Seventeenth  Brigade  consisted  of  the  3d,  loth  and  I3th  Ohio,  and  isth 
Kentucky. —  War  Records,  vol.  vii.,  p.  476. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  479. 

3  Colonel  Terry  was  a  brother  of  David  S.  Terry,  who,  while  Chief  Justice  of 
the  Supreme  Court  of  California,  killed  .David  C.  Broderick,  then  a  United  States 
Senator,  in  a  duel  at  Lake  Merced,  Cal. 

David  S.  Terry,  for  alleged  grievances  growing  out  of  a  decision  of  the  U.  S. 
Circuit  Court  of  California  against  his  wife  (formerly  Sarah  Althea  Hill),  setting 
aside  an  alleged  declaration  of  marriage  between  the  late  millionaire,  Senator  Wm. 
Sharon  and  herself,  in  a  railroad  dining-room  at  Lathrop,  Cal.  (August  14,  1889), 
assaulted  Justice  Stephen  J.  Field,  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  and 


234  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

repeatedly  charge  into  the  ranks  of  the  infantry.  In  a  last 
charge  he  was  killed,  and  the  attacking  force  retired  in  dis 
order.  Great  credit  was  due  to  Colonel  Treba  and  his  small 
command  for  their  conduct. 

Colonel  James  A.  Garfield  was  placed  in  command  of  the 
field  forces  in  the  Big  Sandy  country,  Eastern  Kentucky,  and 
General  Humphrey  Marshall,  of  Kentucky,  who  made  pre 
tensions  to  military  skill,  confronted  him,  each  with  a  force, 
somewhat  scattered,  of  about  five  thousand  men.  Inexperi 
enced  as  Garfield  then  was  in  war,  he,  in  mid-winter,  in  a 
rough  country,  with  desperate  roads  and  with  a  poorly  equip 
ped  command,  with  no  artillery,  displayed  much  energy  and 
ability  in  pushing  his  forces  upon  the  enemy  at  Prestonburg 
and  Paintsville,  Kentucky.  There  were  skirmishes  December 
25,  1861,  at  Grider's  Ferry  on  the  Cumberland  River,  at  Sac 
ramento  on  the  28th,  at  Fishing  Creek  January  8,  1862,  and  a 
considerable  engagement  at  Middle  Creek,  near  Prestonburg, 
on  the  loth,  the  result  of  which  was  to  drive  Marshall  practi 
cally  out  of  Kentucky,  and  to  greatly  demoralize  his  command 
and  put  him  permanently  in  disgrace. 

Next  in  importance  came  the  more  considerable  fight  at 
Logan's  Cross-Roads,  on  Fishing  Creek,  Kentucky,  commonly 
called  the  battle  of  Mill  Springs,  fought  January  19,  1862, 
General  George  H.  Thomas  commanding  the  Union  forces, 
and  General  George  B.  Crittenden  the  Confederates.  The 
Confederate  troops  occupied  an  intrenched  camp  at  Beech 
Grove,  on  the  north  side  of  the  Cumberland  River,  nearly  op 
posite  Mill  Springs.  General  Thomas,  with  a  portion  of  the 
Second  and  Third  Brigades,  Kenny's  battery,  and  a  battalion 

was  himself  twice  shot  and  instantly  killed  by  David  Neagle,  a  deputy  marshal, 
who  accompanied  Justice  Field  to  protect  him  from  threatened  assaults  of  the 
Terrys.  The  Supreme  Court,  on  habeas  corpus,  discharged  Neagle  from  state 
custody,  where  held  for  trial  charged  with  Terry's  murder.  Justice  Lamar  and 
Chief-Justice  Fuller,  adhering  to  effete  state-rights  notions,  denied  the  right  to 
so  discharge  him,  holding  he  should  answer  for  shooting  Terry  to  state  authority, 
that  the  Federal  Government  was  powerless  to  protect  its  marshals  from  prosecu 
tion  for  necessary  acts  done  by  them  in  defence  of  its  courts,  judges  or  justices 
while  engaged  in  the  performance  of  duty. — In  re  Neagle,  135  U.  S.,  I,  52,  76. 


Battle  of  Mill  Springs  235 

of  Wolford's  cavalry,  reached  Logan's  Cross-Roads,  about 
nine  miles  north  of  Beech  Grove,  on  the  I7th,  and  there 
halted  to  await  the  arrival  of  other  troops  before  moving  on 
Crittenden's  position. 

The  latter,  conceiving  that  he  might  strike  Thomas  before 
his  division  was  concentrated,  and  learning  that  Fishing  Creek 
divided  his  forces,  and  was  so  flooded  by  recent  rains  as  to  be 
impassable,  marched  out  of  his  intrenchments  at  Beech  Grove 
at  midnight  of  the  i8th,  and  about  7  A.M.  of  the  igth  fell  upon 
Thomas  at  Logan's  Cross-Roads  with  eight  regiments  of  in 
fantry  and  six  pieces  of  artillery.  The  battle  lasted  about 
three  hours,  when  the  Confederate  troops  gave  way  and  beat 
a  disorderly  retreat  to  their  intrenched  camp,  closely  pursued. 
They  were  driven  behind  their  fortifications  and  cannonaded 
by  the  Union  batteries  until  dark.  General  Thomas  prepared 
to  assault  the  works  the  following  morning.  With  the, aid  of 
a  small  river  steamboat  Crittenden  succeeded  during  the  night 
in  passing  his  troops  across  the  Cumberland,  abandoning 
twelve  pieces  of  artillery,  with  their  caissons  and  ammunition, 
a  large  number  of  small  arms  and  ammunition,  about  160 
wagons,  1000  horses  and  mules,  also  commissary  stores. 

Brigadier-General  F.  K.  Zollicoffer,  of  Tennessee,  who  com 
manded  a  Confederate  brigade,  was  killed  at  a  critical  time  in 
the  battle.  The  number  actually  engaged  on  each  side  was 
about  5000.  The  Union  loss  was  I  officer  and  38  men  killed, 
and  13  officers  and  194  men  wounded,  total  246. !  The  Con 
federate  killed  was  125,  wounded  309,  total  434.  This  victory 
was  of  much  importance,  as  it  was  the  first  of  any  significance 
in  the  Department  of  the  Ohio.  It  was  the  subject  of  a  con 
gratulatory  order  by  the  President.1 

Notwithstanding  this  victory,  President  Lincoln,  long  im 
patient  of  the  delays  of  the  Union  Army  to  advance  and  gain 
some  decided  success,  issued  his  first  (and  last,  looking  to  its 
character,  only)2  *  General  War  Order  "  in  these  words: 

!  War  Records,  vol.  vii.,  pp.  82,  102,  108. 

2  Only  two  other  orders  \vere  issued  (March  8,  1862)  denominated  "President's 
General  War  Orders  "  ;  one  relates  to  the  organization  of  McClellan's  army  into 


236  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

"  President 's  General  War  Order  No.  i. 

"  EXECUTIVE  MANSION,  WASHINGTON, 
"  January  27,   1862. 

"  Ordered,  That  the  22d  of  February,  1862,  be  the  day  for  a 
general  movement  of  the  land  and  naval  forces  of  the  United 
States  against  the  insurgent  forces.  That  especially  the  army  at 
and  about  Fortress  Monroe,  the  Army  of  the  Potomac,  the  Army 
of  Western  Virginia,  the  army  near  Munfordville,  Ky.,  the  army 
and  flotilla  at  Cairo,  and  a  naval  force  in  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  be 
ready  to  move  on  that  day. 

"  That  all  other  forces,  both  land  and  naval,  with  their  respective 
commanders,  obey  existing  orders  for  the  time,  and  be  ready  to 
obey  additional  orders  when  duly  given. 

"  That  the  heads  of  departments,  and  especially  the  Secretaries 
of  War  and  of  the  Navy,  with  all  their  subordinates,  and  the  Gen 
eral-in-Chief,  with  all  other  commanders  and  subordinates  of  land 
and  naval  forces,  will  severally  be  held  to  their  strict  and  full 
responsibilities  for  prompt  execution  of  this  order. 

"ABRAHAM  LINCOLN." 

Conservative  commanding  officers  criticised  this  Presidential 
order  as  an  assumption  on  Mr.  Lincoln's  part  of  the  direction 
of  the  war  in  the  field,  and  the  naming  a  day  for  the  army  and 
navy  to  move  was  denounced  as  unwise  and  a  notice  to  the 
enemy.  Under  other  circumstances,  the  President  would  have 
been  open  to  criticism  from  a  strategist's  standpoint,  but  the 
particular  circumstances  and  the  state  of  the  country  and  the 
public  mind  warranted  his  action.  Foreign  interference  or 
recognition  of  the  Confederacy  was  threatened.  No  decided 
Union  victory  had  been  won.  McClellan  had  held  the  Army 
of  the  Potomac  idle  for  six  months  in  sight  of  the  White 
House.  Halleck  at  St.  Louis,  in  command  of  a  large  and  im 
portant  department,  had  long  talked  of  large  plans  and  so  far 
had  executed  none.  Matters  were  at  a  standstill  in  Western 

corps,  and  the  other  to  its  movement  to  the  Peninsula  and  the  security  of  Wash 
ington. — Mess,  and  Papers  of  the  Presidents,  vol.  vi ,  p.  no. 


Lincoln's  War  Order  No.  I  237 

Virginia.  Buell  was,  so  far,  giving  little  promise  of  an  early 
forward  movement. 

The  Confederate  forces  held  advanced  positions  in  Missouri 
and  high  up  on  the  Mississippi.  They  were  fortified  at  Forts 
Henry  and  Donelson,  on  the  Tennessee  and  the  Cumberland 
respectively,  and  at  Bowling  Green  and  other  important  places 
in  Kentucky.  They  still  held  the  Upper  Kanawha,  the  Green- 
brier  country,  Winchester,  and  other  points  in  the  Shenandoah 
Valley.  The  Confederate  Army  was  holding  McClellan  almost 
within  the  fortifications  south  of  the  Potomac  at  Washington. 
The  President  was  held  responsible  for  the  inactivity  of  the 
?rmy.  Under  other  circumstances,  with  other  army  com 
manders,  the  order  would  not  have  been  issued.  It  served  to 
notify  these  commanders  that  the  army  must  attack  the  enemy, 
and  it  advised  the  country  of  the  earnestness  of  the  President 
to  vigorously  prosecute  the  war,  and  thus  aided  enlistments, 
inspired  confidence,  and  warned  meddling  nations  to  keep 
hands  off.1 

On  January  28,  1862,  both  General  Grant  and  Commodore 
A.  H.  Foote,  Flag  Officer  United  States  Naval  Forces  in  the 
Western  waters,  wired  Halleck  at  St.  Louis  that,  with  his 
permission,  Fort  Henry  on  the  Tennessee  could  be  taken  by 
them.  Authority  being  obtained,  they  invested  and  attacked 
it  by  gunboats  on  the  river  side  and  with  the  army  by  land. 
The  fire  of  the  gunboats  silenced  the  batteries,  and  all  the 
garrison  abandoned  the  fort,  save  General  Lloyd  Tilghman  (its 
commander),  his  staff,  and  one  company  of  about  70  men,  who 
surrendered  February  6th.  A  hospital  boat  containing  60  sick 
and  about  20  heavy  guns,  barracks,  tents,  ammunition,  etc., 
also  fell  into  Union  hands.  The  only  serious  casualty  was  on 
the  Essex,  caused  by  a  shot  in  her  boilers,  which  resulted  in 
wounding  and  scalding  29  officers  and  men,  including  .Com 
modore  David  D.  Porter. 

1  The  taking  by  Captain  Wilkes  (Nov.  8,  1861)  from  the  British  steamer  Trent 
of  the  Confederate  commissioners,  Mason  and  Slidell,  came  so  near  causing  a  war 
with  England,  although  they  were,  with  an  apology,  surrendered  (January  I,  1862) 
to  British  authority,  that  great  fear  existed  that  something  would  produce  a  foreign 
war  and  consequent  intervention. 


238  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

General  Grant  reported  on  the  same  day  that  he  would  take 
Fort  Donelson,  and  on  February  12,  1862,  he  sent  six  regi 
ments  around  by  water  and  moved  the  body  of  his  command 
from  Fort  Henry  across  the  country,  distant  about  twelve  miles. 

Three  gunboats  under  Lieutenant-Commander  S.  L.  Phelps 
went  up  the  Tennessee  as  far  as  Florence,  Alabama,  while 
others  proceeded  to  the  mouth  of  the  Cumberland  and  ascended 
it  to  aid  the  land  forces. 

Commander  Phelps  on  his  way  up  the  river  seized  two 
steamers,  caused  six  others  loaded  with  supplies  to  be  de 
stroyed,  took  at  Cerro  Gordo  a  half-finished  gunboat,  and 
made  other  important  captures  of  military  supplies.  He  dis 
covered  considerable  Union  sentiment  among  the  inhabitants, 
some  of  them  voluntarily  enlisting  to  fight  the  Confederacy.1 

Grant  was  assigned  to  the  District  of  West  Tennessee  Feb 
ruary  14,  1862. 2 

General  Grant  had,  when  he  commenced  the  attack  on  Fort 
Donelson,  about  15,000  men,  in  three  divisions,  commanded, 
respectively,  by  Generals  C.  F.  Smith,  John  A.  McClernand, 
and  Lew  Wallace.  The  total  force  of  the  enemy  was  not  less 
than  20,000,  under  command  of  General  J.  B.  Floyd.3  The 
investment  of  the  fort  commenced  on  the  I2th,  but  it  was  not 
complete  until  the  evening  of  the  I3th,  on  the  arrival  of  the 
gunboats  and  the  troops  sent  by  water.  Flag  Officer  Foote 
opened  fire  on  the  enemy's  works  at  3  P.M.  on  the  Hth,  from 
four  gunboats,  which  continued  for  an  hour  and  a  half  with  a 
brilliant  prospect  of  complete  success,  when  each  of  the  two 
leading  boats  received  disabling  shots  and  were  carried  back 
by  the  current.  The  other  two  were  soon  partially  disabled 
and  hence  withdrawn  from  the  fight.  Grant  then  concluded 
to  closely  invest  the  fort,  partially  fortify  his  lines,  and  allow 
time  for  Commodore  Foote  to  retire,  repair  his  gunboats,  and 

1  War  Records,  vol.  vii.,  p.  155. 

*  Ibid.,  vol.  viii.,  p.  555. 

3  Grant  estimates  his  own  force  on  the  surrender  of  the  fort  at  27,000,  but  not 
all  available  for  attack,  and  the  number  of  Confederates  on  the  day  preceding  at 
21,000. — Memoirs  of  Grant,  vol.  i.,  p.  314. 


Battle  of  Fort  Donelson  239 

return.  But  the  enemy  did  not  permit  this  to  be  done.  He 
drew  out  from  his  left  the  principal  part  of  his  effective  troops 
under  Generals  Gideon  J.  Pillow,  B.  R.  Johnson,  and  S.  B. 
Buckner  during  the  night  of  the  I4th,  and  at  early  dawn  of 
the  1 5th  assailed,  with  the  purpose  of  raising  the  siege  or  of 
escaping,  the  extreme  right  of  Grant's  army.  A  battle 
of  several  hours'  duration  ensued,  and  for  the  most  part  the 
Confederates  gained  ground,  driving  back  the  Union  right 
upon  the  centre.  Grant  was  absent  in  consultation  with  Com 
modore  Foote  l  when  the  attack  began.  Foote  was  then 
contemplating  a  return  to  Cairo  to  repair  damages,  and  was 
likewise  wounded.1  Grant  on  returning  to  the  battle-ground 
ordered  a  counter  attack  on  the  enemy's  right  by  Smith's 
division,  which  met  with  such  success  as  to  gain,  at  the  close 
of  the  day,  possession  of  parts  of  the  Confederate  intrench- 
ments.  After  Smith's  charge  had  commenced,  McClernand 
and  Wallace  were  ordered  to  assume  the  offensive  on  the 
enemy's  left  flank,  which  resulted  in  driving  the  Confederates 
back  to  the  works  from  whence  they  had  emerged  in  the 
morning.  Preparation  was  then  made  for  an  assault  all  along 
the  line  early  the  next  morning. 

Consternation  and  demoralization  prevailed  in  the  Confed 
erate  camps  during  the  night,  especially  at  headquarters. 

A  council  of  war  was  held  at  midnight  of  the  i$th  between 
Floyd,  Pillow,  and  Buckner,  at  which  the  number  of  Grant's 
army  was  greatly  magnified,  and  it  was  decided  that  it  was  im 
practicable  to  attempt  to  cut  through  the  investment.  Floyd 
pretended  to  believe  that  his  capture  was  of  the  first  impor 
tance  to  the  Union  cause,  and,  although  the  senior  in  command, 
he  announced  a  determination  "  not  to  survive  a  surrender 
there."  Pillow,  the  next  in  command,  also  assumed  the  same 
importance  and  individual  right  for  himself;  hence  Floyd, 
through  Pillow,  turned  over  the  command,  at  the  end  of  the 
council,  to  Buckner,  with  the  understanding  that  the  latter 
would,  at  the  earliest  hour  possible,  open  negotiations  for  the 

1  War  Records,  vol.  viii.,  pp.  160,  167. 


240  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

surrender  of  the  forces.1  Floyd  and  Pillow,  with  the  aid  of 
two  small  steamboats,  which  arrived  from  Nashville  in  the 
night,  succeeded  in  ferrying  across  the  river  and  in  getting 
away  with  about  1000  officers  and  men,  principally  belonging 
to  Floyd's  old  brigade.  Some  cavalry  and  small  detachments 
and  individual  officers  with  Colonel  Forrest  escaped  in  the 
night  by  the  river  road,  which  was  only  passable,  on  account 
of  back-water,  for  mounted  men.2 

The  action  of  both  Floyd  and  Pillow  in  not  sharing  the  fate 
of  their  commands,  and  the  conduct  of  Floyd  especially  in 
carrying  off  the  troops  of  his  old  brigade  in  preference  to 
others,  were  strongly  condemned  by  President  Davis  and  his 
Secretary  of  War.  Both  Generals  were,  by  Davis's  orders, 
relieved,2  and  neither,  thereafter,  held  any  command  of  im 
portance.  The  sun  of  their  military  glory  set  at  Donelson. 
Floyd  had  been  unfaithful  to  his  trust  as  Buchanan's  Secre 
tary  of  War,  and  early,  as  we  have  seen,  deserted  his  post  to 
join  the  Rebellion.  Pillow  as  a  general  officer  had  won  a 
name  in  fighting  under  Taylor  and  Scott  and  the  flag  of  the 
Republic  in  Mexico. 

At  an  early  hour  on  the  i6th  Buckner  sent  a  note  to  Grant 
proposing  "  the  appointment  of  commissioners  to  agree  upon 
the  terms  of  capitulation  of  the  forces  and  post  "  under  his 
command,  and  suggesting  an  armistice  until  12  o'clock  of  that 
day.  To  this  note  Grant  responded  thus : 

"Yours  of  this  date,  proposing  armistice  and  appointment  of 
commissioners  to  settle  terms  of  capitulation,  is  just  received.  No 
terms  except  unconditional  and  immediate  surrender  can  be  accepted.  I 
propose  to  move  immediately  on  your  works" 

General  Buckner  denominated  Grant's  terms  as"  ungenerous 
and  unchiv  air  oiis"  but  accepted  them,  forthwith  capitulating 
with  about  15,000  officers  and  men,  about  40  pieces  of  artil 
lery,  and  a  large  amount  of  stores,  horses,  mules,  and  other 
public  property. 

1  War  Records,  vol.  vii.,  pp.  269,  283,  288. 
*  Ibid.,  pp.  274,  254. 


Capture  of  Nashville  241 

The  casualties  in  Grant's  army  were  22  officers  and  478  en 
listed  men  killed,  and  87  officers  and  2021  men  wounded,  total 
2608. l  The  loss  in  the  navy  under  Foote  was  10  killed  and 
44  wounded.  The  Confederate  killed  and  wounded  probably 
did  not  exceed  I5OO,2  as  they  fought,  in  most  part,  behind  in- 
trenchments.  The  capture  of  Fort  Donelson  was  thus  far  the 
greatest  achievement  of  the  war,  and  won  for  Grant  just  renown. 

The  writer's  regiment,  as  we  have  stated,  went  into  camp 
in  December,  1861,  at  Bacon  Creek,  Kentucky.  The  winter 
was  rainy  and  severe,  the  camps  were  much  of  the  time  muddy, 
and  the  troops  underwent  many  hardships.  It  was  their  first 
winter  in  tents,  and  many  were  sick. 

Colonel  Marrow,  on  one  pretence  or  another,  was  generally 
absent  at  Louisville,  and  the  responsibility  of  the  drill  and  dis 
cipline  of  the  regiment  devolved  on  Lieutenant-Colonel  Beatty, 
who  was  quite  equal  to  it,  notwithstanding  Marrow  said  and 
did  much  to  prejudice  the  regiment  against  him.  The  writer 
also  had  the  Colonel's  displeasure. 

On  his  return  to  the  regiment,  January  28th,  Beatty  handed 
him,  to  be  forwarded,  charges  relating  to  his  disloyalty,  un- 
military  conduct,  and  inefficiency;  whereupon  he  decided  to 
resign  and  the  charges  were  withdrawn.  Beatty  became 
Colonel  and  I  Lieutenant-Colonel,  February  12,  1862. 

Buell's  army  commenced  to  move  southward  February  loth, 
Mitchel's  division  in  the  advance. 

The  high  railroad  bridge  over  Green  River  at  Munfordville 
had  no  railing  or  protection  on  the  sides,  but  it  was  safely 
passed  over  with  the  teams  by  moonlight.  The  scene  of  the 
crossing  was  highly  picturesque,  and  attracted  much  attention 
from  the  troops  just  starting  on  a  new  campaign. 

The  march  of  the  I4th  developed  much  of  interest.  There 
were  evident  signs  of  loyalty  at  the  houses  of  all  who  owned 
no  slaves,  and  where  slaves  appeared  they  exhibited  the 
greatest  delight  to  see  the  Union  soldiers.  All  slaves  had 
the  belief  that  we  had  come  to  free  them,  and  there  was  much 

1  War  Records,  vol.  vii.,  pp.  167,  270. 
*  Ibid.,  pp.  269,  283,  288. 

VOL.  K— 16. 


242  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

difficulty  in  preventing  them  from  marching  with  us.  The 
country  through  which  we  passed  was  cavernous,  and  the  sur 
face  had  many  bowl-like  depressions,  at  the  bottom  of  which 
was,  generally,  considerable  water.  Springs  and  streams  were 
scarce.  The  Confederates  on  retiring  drove  their  disabled, 
diseased  and  broken-down  horses,  mules,  etc.,  into  these  ponds 
and  shot  them,  leaving  them  to  decay  and  thus  render  the 
water  unfit  for  use  by  the  Union  Army.1  The  troops  had  no 
choice  but  to  use  the  water  from  the  befouled  ponds.  We 
shall  hear  of  them  again. 

On  this  day  the  division  reached  Barren  River  and  exchanged 
a  few  artillery  shots  with  the  rear  of  General  A.  S.  Johnson's 
army,  under  the  immediate  command  of  General  Hardee. 
The  next  day — the  last  day  of  fighting  at  Fort  Donelson — the 
advance  of  Mitchel's  division  crossed  the  river  and  occupied 
Bowling  Green,  which  was  found  strongly  fortified  and  a 
naturally  good  position  for  defence.  In  its  hasty  evacuation 
many  stores  were  burned ;  others  distributed  to  the  inhabit 
ants,  and  some  abandoned  to  capture.  After  an  unaccountable 
delay  here  of  one  week,  during  which  time  we  heard  of  the 
victory  at  Fort  Donelson,  Mitchel's  division,  still  in  advance, 
resumed  its  march  towards  Nashville,  distant  about  seventy 
miles.  The  head  of  the  division  reached  Edgefield  (suburb 
of  Nashville  on  the  north  bank  of  the  Cumberland)  on  the 
evening  of  the  24th  of  February,  and  the  following  morning 
the  Mayor  and  a  committee  of  citizens  formally  surrendered 
the  city  of  Nashville  while  yet  Forrest's  cavalry  occupied  it. 
General  Nelson's  division  of  Buell's  army  arrived  by  boats  the 
night  of  the  24th,  and  at  once  landed  in  the  city. 

Nashville  would  have  been  a  rich  prize  and  easily  taken  if 
troops  from  either  Donelson  or  Bowling  Green  had  been  pushed 
forward  without  delay  when  Fort  Donelson  fell. 

General  A.  S.   Johnson  abandoned  the  city  as  early  as  the 

1  General  Beatty  accuses  me,  justly,  of  depriving  him,  at  Bell's  Tavern  when  very 
hungry,  of  a  supper,  by  too  freely  commenting,  when  we  were  seated  at  the 
mess-table,  on  the  soupy  character  and  the  color  of  the  mule  hairs  in  the  coffee. 
— Citizen  Soldier,  p.  1 06. 


Capture  of  Nashville  243 

i6th,  and  concentrated  his  forces  at  Murfreesboro,  thirty  or 
more  miles  distant,  leaving  only  Floyd  with  a  demoralized 
brigade  and  Colonel  N,  B.  Forrest's  small  cavalry  command 
to  remove  or  destroy  the  guns  and  stores,  of  which  there  was 
an  immense  quantity. 

Floyd  was  ordered  by  Johnson  not  to  fight  in  the  city.1 
Pandemonium  reigned  everywhere  in  Nashville  for  a  week 
before  it  was  taken.  The  mob,  in  which  all  classes  partici 
pated,  had  possession  of  it.  The  proper  officers  abandoned 
their  stores  of  ordnance,  quartermaster  and  commissary  sup 
plies,  and  such  as  were  portable  were,  as  far  as  possible,  carried 
off  by  anybody  who  might  desire  them.  No  kind  of  property 
was  safe,  private  houses  and  property  were  seized  and  appro 
priated.  No  other  such  disgraceful  scene  has  been  enacted 
in  modern  times.3 

Johnson  had  a  right  to  expect  the  arrival  of  the  Union  Army 
as  early  as  the  i8th,  and  had  wise  counsel  prevailed,  Nashville 
might  have  been  taken  on  that  or  an  earlier  day. 

A  diversity  of  views  led  to  delays  in  the  movement  of  Buell's 
army.  Buell  early  expressed  himself  favorable  to  moving 
directly  on  Nashville  via  Bowling  Green  or  by  embarking  his 
divisions  at  Louisville  on  steamboats  and  thence  by  water  up 
the  Cumberland.3 

Halieck  pronounced  the  movement  from  Bowling  Green  on 
Nashville  as  not  good  strategy,  and  this  opinion  he  telegraphed 
both  Buell  and  McClellan.  Success  at  Fort  Donelson  did  not 
change  Halleck's  views,  and  Grant  was  condemned  for  advan 
cing  Smith's  division  to  Clarksville.  After  Buell  reached 
Nashville  he  became  panic-stricken,  and,  though  he  had  15,000 
men,  possessed  of  an  idea  that  he  was  to  be  overwhelmed. 
He  assumed,  therefore,  to  order  Smith's  command  of  Grant's 
army  to  move  by  boat  from  Clarksville  to  his  relief.4 

The  first  time  I  saw  Grant  was  on  the  wharf  at  Nashville, 

1  War  Records,  vol.  vii.,  pp.  426,  433. 

2  Forrest's  Rep.,  Ibid.,  vol.  vii.,  p.  429. 

3  War  Records,  vol.  vii.,  pp.  619-621,  624. 

4  Grant's  Memoirs,  vol.  i.,  p.  320. 


244  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

February  26,  1862.  He  was  fresh  from  his  recent  achieve 
ments,  and  we  looked  upon  him  with  interest.  He  was  then 
only  a  visitor  at  Nashville.  His  quiet,  modest  demeanor,  so 
characteristic  of  him  under  all  circumstances,  led  persons  to 
speak  of  him  slightingly,  as  only  a  common-looking  man  who 
had,  by  luck,  or  through  others,  achieved  success.  He  was 
then  forty  years  old,1  below  medium  height  and  weight,  but 
of  firm  build  and  well  proportioned.  His  head,  for  his  body, 
seemed  large.  His  somewhat  pronounced  jaw  indicated  firm 
ness  and  decision.  His  hands  and  feet  were  small,  and  his 
movements  deliberate  and  unimpassioned.  He  then,  as  always, 
talked  readily,  but  never  idly  nor  solely  to  entertain  even  his 
friends. 

Both  Halleck  and  Buell  were  apparently  either  jealous  of 
Grant  or  they  entertained  or  assumed  to  entertain  a  real  con 
tempt  for  his  talents.  Buell  paid  him  little  attention  at  Nash 
ville,  and  Halleck  reported  him  to  the  War  Department  for 
going  there,  although  the  city  was  within  the  limits  of  his  dis 
trict.  His  going  to  Nashville  was  subsequently  assigned  as  a 
reason  for  practically  relieving  him  of  his  command.2 

Reports  that  Grant  was  frequently  intoxicated,  and  that  to 
members  of  his  staff  and  to  subordinate  commanders  he  was 
indebted  for  his  recent  victories,  were  at  this  time  freely  circu 
lated.  Grant,  like  most  great  generals  in  war,  had  to  develop 
through  experience,  and  even  through  defeats.  He,  however, 
early  showed  a  disposition  to  take  responsibilities  and  to  seize 
opportunities  to  fight  the  enemy.  He  had  the  merit  of  obsti 
nacy,  a  quality  indispensable  in  a  good  soldier. 

In  contrast  with  him,  Halleck  and  Buell,  each  pretending  to 
more  military  education  and  accomplishments,  lacked  either 
confidence  in  their  troops  or  in  themselves,  and  hence  were 
slow  to  act.  Complicate  and  difficult  possible  campaigns  were 
talked  of  by  them  but  never  personally  executed.  They  were 
each  good  organizers  of  armies  on  paper,  knew  much  of  the 
equipment  and  drilling  of  troops,  also  of  their  discipline  in 

1  Grant  was  born  April  27,  1822,  at  Point  Pleasant,  Clermont  Co.,  Ohio. 
"Grant's  Memoirs,  vol.  i.,  p.  326;    War  Records,  vol.  vii.,  pp.  682-3. 


Grant — Personal  Mention  245 

camp,  but  the  absence  in  each  of  an  eagerness  to  meet  the 
enemy  and  fight  him  disqualified  them  from  inspiring  soldiers 
with  that  confidence  which  wins  victories.  Mere  reputation  for 
technical  military  education  rather  detracts  from  than  adds  to 
the  confidence  an  army  has  in  its  commander.  Such  a  com 
mander  will  be  esteemed  a  good  military  clerk  or  adjutant- 
general,  but  not  likely  to  seek  and  win  battles. 

The  3d  Ohio,  with  the  brigade,  marched  through  Nashville 
on  the  2/th  of  February,  and  went  into  camp  at  a  creek  on  the 
Murfreesboro  turnpike  about  four  miles  from  the  city.  Quiet 
was  restored  in  Nashville,  the  inhabitants  seeming  to  appreciate 
the  good  order  preserved  by  the  Union  troops,  especially  after 
the  recent  experience  with  the  mob. 

At  Nashville  the  3d  Ohio's  officers  (especially  Colonel  Beatty) 
were  charged  with  harboring  negro  slaves,  and  Buell  gave  some 
slave-hunters  permission  to  search  the  regiment's  camp  for 
their  escaped  '  'property. ' '  The  Colonel  ordered  all  the  colored 
men  to  be  assembled  for  inspection,  but  it  so  happened  that 
not  one  could  be  found.  One  of  the  slave-hunters  proposed 
to  search  a  tent  for  a  certain  runaway  slave,  and  he  was  earnestly 
told  by  Colonel  Beatty  that  he  might  do  so,  but  that  if  he  were 
successful  in  his  search  it  would  cost  him  his  life.  No  further 
search  was  made.  One  of  the  runaway  slaves,  "  Joe,"  a  hand 
some  mulatto,  borrowed  (?)  from  Colonel  Beatty,  Assistant 
Surgeon  Henry  H.  Seys,  and  perhaps  others,  small  sums  of 
money  and  disappeared.  Some  time  afterwards  I  saw  "Joe  " 
in  the  employ  of  Hon.  Samson  Mason  in  Springfield,  Ohio. 

On  the  8th  of  March,  John  Morgan,  the  then  famous  partisan 
irregular  cavalry  raider,  dashed  from  a  narrow  road  along  the 
west  side  of  the  Insane  Asylum,  located  about  five  miles  from 
Nashville  on  the  Murfreesboro  pike,  and  captured,  in  daylight, 
a  part  of  a  wagon  train  inside  our  lines  and  made  off  over  a  by 
road  with  Captain  Braden  of  General  Dumont's  staff,  who  had 
the  train  in  charge,  the  teamsters,  and  about  eighty  horses  and 
mules.  Colonel  John  Kennett,  with  a  portion  of  his  regiment 
(4th  Ohio  Cavalry)  pursued  and  overtook  Morgan,  killed  and 
wounded  a  portion  of  his  raiders,  and  recaptured  Captain 


246  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

Braden  and  the  drivers ;  also  the  horses  and  mules.  About 
this  time  Mitchel  organized  a  party  of  infantry  to  be  rapidly 
transported  in  wagons,  and  some  cavalry,  to  move  by  night 
upon  Murfreesboro,  with  the  expectation  of  surprising  a 
small  force  there.  The  expedition  started,  but  had  not  pro 
ceeded  far  when  about  nine  o'clock  at  night  the  head  of  the 
expedition  was  met  by  Morgan  and  about  twenty-five  of  his 
men  with  a  flag  of  truce,  he  pretending  to  desire  to  make  some 
inquiry.  The  flag  of  truce  at  night  was  so  extraordinary  that 
he  and  his  party  were  escorted  to  the  Asylum  grounds,  and 
there  detained  until  Buell  could  be  communicated  with.  The 
expedition  was,  of  course,  abandoned,  and  about  midnight 
Morgan  and  his  escort  were  dismissed. 

Columbus,  Kentucky,  regarded  as  a  Gibraltar  of  strength, 
strongly  fortified  and  supplied  with  many  guns,  most  of  which 
were  of  heavy  calibre,  deemed  necessary  to  prevent  the  naviga 
tion  of  the  Mississippi,  was  occupied  by  General  Leonidas 
Polk  with  a  force  of  22,000  men,  but  on  being  threatened  with 
attack  by  Commodore  Foote  and  General  W.  T.  Sherman,  was 
evacuated  March  2,  1862.'  The  State  of  Kentucky  thus  be 
came  practically  free  from  Confederate  occupancy,  and  the 
Mississippi,  for  a  considerable  distance  below  Cairo  was  again 
open  to  navigation  from  the  North. 

1  War  Records,  vol.  vii.,  p.  853. 


CHAPTER  VI 

BATTLE    OF    SHILOH  —  CAPTURE    OF    ISLAND    NO.    IO  —  HAL- 
LECK'S   ADVANCE   ON   CORINTH,  AND    OTHER   EVENTS 

GENERAL  ALBERT  SIDNEY  JOHNSTON,  while  at 
Murfrecsboro  (February   3,    1862)  assumed   full  com 
mand  of  the  Central  Army,  Western  Department,  and 
commenced  its  reorganization  for  active  field  work,  and  on  the 
27th  commenced  moving  it,  with  a  view  to  concentration  at 
Corinth,  Miss.1 

General  P.  T.  G.  Beauregard,  March  5th,  assumed  command 
of  the  Army  of  the  Mississippi.  On  the  2Qth  the  Confederate 
armies  of  Kentucky  and  the  Mississippi  were  consolidated  at 
Corinth  under  the  latter  designation,  Johnston  in  chief  com 
mand,  with  Beauregard  as  second,  and  Generals  Leonidas  Polk, 
Braxton  Bragg,  Wm.  J.  Hardee,  and  Geo.  B.  Crittenden,  re 
spectively,  commanding  corps.  Later,  General  John  C. 
Breckinridge  was  assigned  to  the  Reserve  Corps,  relieving 
Crittenden.  The  total  strength  of  this  army  was  59,774,  and 
present  for  duty  (April  3d)  49,444.*  This  was,  then,  the  most 
formidable  and  best  officered  and  organized  army  of  the  Con 
federacy  for  active  field  operations.  To  confront  this  large 
force  there  was  the  Army  of  the  Tennessee,  with  an  aggregate 
present  for  duty  of  44,895,  of  all  arms.3  Grant  had  sixty-two 
pieces  of  artillery,  and  his  troops  consisted  of  five  divisions  com 
manded,  respectively,  by  Generals  John  A.  McClernand,  W. 
H.  L.  Wallace,  Lew  Wallace,  Stephen  A.  Hurlburt,  W.  T. 
Sherman,  and  B.  M.  Prentiss. 

1  War  Records,  vol.  vii.,  pp.  904,  911.      *  Ibid,,  vol.  x.,  Part  I.,  p.  C9§  (3Q6). 
3  Ibid.,  vol.  x.,  Part  I.,  p.  112. 

247 


248  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

On  April  3,  1862,  the  Army  of  the  Mississippi  was  started 
for  Shiloh,  about  twenty  miles  distant,  under  a  carefully  pre 
pared  field-order,  assigning  to  each  corps  its  line  of  march  and 
place  of  assembling  and  giving  general  and  detailed  instructions 
for  the  expected  battle,  the  purpose  being  to  surprise  the  Union 
army  at  daylight  on  Saturday,  the  5th.  Hardee's  corps  consti 
tuted  the  left  of  the  Confederate  army,  and  on  reaching  the 
battle-ground  his  left  was  to  rest  on  Owl  Creek,  a  tributary  of 
Snake  Creek,  his  right  extending  towards  Lick  Creek.  Bragg's 
corps  constituted  the  Confederate  right,  its  right  to  rest  on 
Lick  Creek.  Both  these  corps  were  to  be  formed  for  the  battle 
in  two  lines,  1000  yards  apart,  the  right  wing  of  each  corps  to 
form  the  front  line.  Folk's  corps  was  to  move  behind  the  two 
corps  mentioned,  and  mass  in  column  and  halt  on  the  Bark 
Road,  as  a  reserve.  The  Reserve  Corps  under  Breckinridge 
was  ordered  to  concentrate  at  Monterey  and  there  take  position 
from  whence  to  advance,  as  required,  on  either  the  direct  road 
to  Pittsburg  Landing  or  to  Hamburg.  Other  instructions  were 
given  for  detachments  of  this  army.  The  order  was  to  make 
every  effort  in  the  approaching  battle  to  turn  the  left  of  the 
Union  Army,  cut  it  off  from  the  Tennessee,  and  throw  it  back 
on  Owl  Creek,  and  there  secure  its  surrender.1 

Johnston  issued  this  address: 

"  Soldiers  of  the  Army  of  the  Mississippi : 

"  I  have  put  you  in  motion  to  offer  battle  to  the  invaders  of  your 
country.  With  the  resolution  and  disciplined  valor  becoming  men 
fighting,  as  you  are,  for  all  worth  living  or  dying  for,  you  cannot 
but  march  to  decisive  victory  over  agrarian  mercenaries,  sent  to 
subjugate  and  despoil  you  of  your  liberties,  property,  and  honor. 
Remember  the  precious  stake  involved.  Remember  the  depen 
dence  of  your  mothers,  your  wives,  your  sisters,  and  your  children 
on  the  result.  Remember  the  fair,  broad,  abounding  land,  the 
happy  homes,  and  ties  that  will  be  desolated  by  your  defeat.  The 
eyes  and  hopes  of  8,000,000  of  people  rest  upon  you.  You  are  ex 
pected  to  show  yourselves  worthy  of  your  valor  and  lineage  ;  worthy 
of  the  women  of  the  South,  whose  noble  devotion  in  this  war  has 

1  War  Records,  vol.  x.,  Part  I.,  pp.  392-7. 


Battle  of  Shiloh  249 

never  been  exceeded  in  any  time.  With  such  incentives  to  brave 
deeds  and  with  the  trust  that  God  is  with  us,  your  generals  will 
lead  you  confidently  to  the  combat,  assured  of  success." 

Five  of  Grant's  divisions  were  encamped  at  or  in  front  of 
Pittsburg  Landing,  between  Owl  and  Lick  Creeks;  Sherman's 
division  (except  Stuart's  brigade)  being  in  front,  near  and  to 
the  right  of  Shiloh  Church,  was  the  most  advanced.  McCler- 
nand's  division  was  located  about  one  half  mile  to  his  rear, 
covering  his  left.  Prentiss'  division  lay  within  about  one  half 
mile  (a  little  retired)  of  McClernand's  in  the  direction  of  the 
mouth  of  Lick  Creek,  and  Stuart's  brigade  was  still  to 
Prentiss'  left  on  the  Hamburg  road.  Hurlburt's  and  Smith's 
divisions — the  latter  on  the  right,  commanded  on  the  field  by 
General  \V.  H.  L.  Wallace  in  consequence  of  Smith's  absence 
at  Savannah  sick — were  about  a  mile  in  rear  of  McClernand 
and  Prentiss,  and  about  three  quarters  of  a  mile  from  Pittsburg 
Landing.1 

Lew  Wallace's  division,  numbering  present  for  duty  7302 
men,  with  ten  pieces  of  artillery,  was  near  Crump's  Landing  on 
the  west  bank  of  the  Tennessee,  five  miles  below  Pittsburg 
Landing  and  four  miles  above  Savannah.2 

By  a  straight  line  Savannah  is  seven  miles  below  Pittsburg 
Landing.  Hamburg  is  four  miles  above  this  landing,  on  the 
same  side  of  the  river  and  above  the  mouth  of  Lick  Creek. 
Shiloh  Church,  a  log  structure  about  two  and  a  half  miles  from 
the  river,  gave  the  name  to  the  battle. 

We  left  Buell's  army  at  Nashville.  It  remained  there  from 
February  25  to  March  15,  1862,  when  his  cavalry  started  for 
Savannah,  where  the  Army  of  the  Tennessee  was  then  partially 
assembled  under  General  C.  F.  Smith.  Halleck  had,  March 
4th,  relieved  Grant  from  any  active  command  in  the  field,  and 
ordered  him  to  place  Smith  in  command  of  the"  expedition," 
and  himself  remain  at  Fort  Henry.  Grant  chafed  much  under 
this  treatment,  and  repeatedly  asked  to  be  relieved  of  further 
service  under  Halleck.  Grant's  recent  successes  at  Forts 

1  War  Records,  atlas,  Plate  XII.  *  Ibid.,  vol.  x.,  Part  I.,  p.  112. 


250  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

Henry  and  Donelson,  and  his  exceptional  character  for  assum 
ing  responsibilities  and  fighting,  led  to  a  public  demand  for  his 
restoration,  which  reached  Washington  and  Halleck,  and  forced 
the  latter,  on  the  I3th  of  March,  to  restore  him  to  the  com 
mand  of  his  army  and  district.  Grant  reached  Savannah  on 
the  I7th  of  March,  and  found  Smith  fatally  ill,  and  a  portion 
of  the  troops  already  at  Pittsburg  Landing  on  the  west  bank  of 
the  Tennessee.  He  subsequently  ordered  other  divisions  to 
the  Landing,  and  although  the  question  of  intrenching  was 
considered,  his  chief  engineer  officer,  Colonel  (afterwards  Major- 
General)  James  B.  McPherson,  reported  against  the  necessity 
or  practicability  of  employing  the  raw  troops  in  constructing 
defensive  works.  It  was  decided  the  undisciplined  and  un- 
drilled  soldiers  (as  most  of  them  were)  could  be  better  prepared 
for  the  impending  campaign  by  drilling  them. 

Grant  made  his  headquarters  at  Savannah  (east  of  the  Ten 
nessee),  leaving  Sherman  in  charge  of  that  portion  of  the  army 
in  front  of  Pittsburg  Landing. 

Besides  some  troops  of  Buell's  army  who  were  left  to  hold 
Nashville,  Mitchel's  division  was  detached  to  operate  on  a  line 
through  Murfreesboro  south  into  Alabama  or  to  Chattanooga, 
as  might  seem  best. 

McCook's  division  left  Nashville  March  i6th,  following  the 
cavalry,  and  other  divisions  of  Buell's  army  followed  at  inter 
vals.  At  Columbia,  Tennessee,  McCook  was  detained,  recon 
structing  a  burned  bridge  over  Duck  River,  until  the  3<Dth. 
Nelson  reached  this  river,  and  by  fording  crossed  his  division 
on  the  29th,  and  was  then  given  the  advance.  Buell  did  not 
hasten  his  march  nor  did  Grant,  it  would  seem,  regard  his  early 
arrival  important.  The  purpose  was  to  concentrate  the  Army 
of  the  Ohio  at  Savannah,  not  earlier  than  Sunday  and  Mon 
day,  the  6th  and  /th  of  April. 

Nelson's  division  reached  there  the  evening  of  the  5th,  of 
which  Grant  had  notice.  Buell  arrived  about  the  same  time, 
but  did  not  report  his  arrival,  or  attempt  to  do  so  until  8  A.M. 
the  6th,  when  Grant  had  gone  to  Pittsburg  Landing  to  take 
personal  command  in  the  battle  then  raging  with  great  fury. 


Battle  of  Shiloh  251 

It  is  well  to  remember  that  General  Grant,  on  whom  the  re 
sponsibility  of  the  campaign  and  impending  conflict  rested, 
had  been  actually  present  with  his  army  but  twenty  days  when 
the  battle  commenced ;  that  he  did  not  select  the  position  of 
the  advance  divisions  of  his  army,  and  could  not,  if  he  had 
chosen  to  do  so,  have  changed  the  place  of  the  junction  of 
Buell's  army  with  his,  as  Halleck  had  fixed  upon  Savannah  as 
that  place,  and  Buell  was  slowly  marching  towards  it  before 
Grant's  arrival  there. 

The  unfriendly  disposition  of  Halleck  and  the  lack  of 
cordiality  of  Buell  towards  Grant  made  matters  extremely 
embarrassing.  Buell  was  Grant's  junior,  but  he  had  com 
manded  a  department  for  a  considerable  time  while  Grant  only 
commanded  a  district,  and  this  alone  may  account  for  a  natural 
reluctance  on  Buell's  part  to  serve  under  him.  Had  Buell's 
army  arrived  promptly  on  the  Tennessee,  the  battle  of  Shiloh 
would  not  have  been  fought,  as  both  Johnston  and  Beauregard 
determined  the  attack  was  only  practicable  before  Grant's  and 
Buell's  armies  united. 

Grant  was  seriously  injured,  after  dark  on  the  4th  of  April, 
while  returning  to  Pittsburg  Landing  in  a  rain  storm  from  in 
vestigating  some  unusual  picket  firing  at  the  front.  His  horse 
had  fallen  on  him,  injuring  his  leg  and  spraining  an  ankle  so 
much  that  his  boot  had  to  be  cut  off.  He  was  unable  to  walk 
without  the  aid  of  crutches  for  some  days  after  the  battle.1 

In  the  controversy  as  to  whether  the  Union  Army  at  Shiloh 
was  surprised  on  the  morning  of  the  first  day  I  do  not  care  to 
enter.  The  testimony  of  Sherman  and  his  brigade  commander, 
General  Ralph  P.  Buckland,  as  well  as  that  of  Grant,  with  all  of 
whom  I  have  conversed  on  this  point,  should  be  taken  as  con 
clusive,  that  as  early  as  the  4th  of  April  they  knew  of  the  pres 
ence  of  considerable  organizations  of  Confederate  cavalry,  and 
that  on  the  evening  of  the  5th  they  had  encountered  such  num 
bers  of  the  enemy  as  to  satisfy  the  Union  officers  on  the  field 
that  the  enemy  contemplated  making  an  attack;  yet  it  is  quite 
certain  these  officers  did  not  know  on  the  evening  of  April  5th 

1  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol.  i.,  p.  466. 


252  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

that  the  splendidly  officered  and  organized  Confederate  Army 
was  in  position  in  front  and  close  up  to  Shiloh  Church  as  a 
centre,  in  full  array,  with  a  definite  plan,  fully  understood  by 
all  its  officers,  for  a  battle  on  the  morrow.  Nothing  had  gone 
amiss  in  Johnston's  plan,  save  the  loss  of  one  day,  which  post 
poned  the  opening  of  the  attack  from  dawn  of  Saturday  to 
the  same  time  on  Sunday.  The  friends  of  the  Confederacy 
will  never  cease  to  deplore  the  loss,  on  the  march  from  Corinth, 
of  this  one  day.  Many  yet  pretend  to  think  the  fate  of  slavery 
and  the  Confederacy  turned  on  it.  Grant  was  not  quite  so 
well  prepared  for  battle  on  Saturday  as  on  Sunday,  and  no 
part  of  the  Army  of  the  Ohio  could  or  would  have  come  to 
his  aid  sooner  than  Sunday.  Grant,  however,  says  he  did  not 
despair  of  success  without  Buell's  army,1  though  he  desired 
its  earlier  arrival. 

Grant,  when  the  battle  opened,  was  nine  miles  by  boat  from 
Pittsburg  Landing,  which  was  at  least  two  more  miles  from  Shi 
loh  Church,  where  the  battle  opened.  Up  to  the  morning  of 
the  battle  he  had  apprehensions  that  an  attack  might  be  made 
on  Crump's  Landing,  Lew  Wallace's  position,  with  a  view 
to  the  destruction  of  the  Union  stores  and  transports.1  He 
heard  the  first  distant  sound  of  battle  while  at  Savannah  eating 
breakfast,1  and  by  dispatch-boat  hastened  to  reach  his  already 
fiercely  assailed  troops,  pausing  only  long  enough  to  order 
Nelson  to  march  to  Pittsburg  Landing  and,  while  en  route, 
to  direct  Wallace,  at  Crump's  Landing,  to  put  his  division 
under  arms  ready  for  any  orders.  Certain  it  is  that  the  Union 
division  commanders  at  Shiloh  did  not,  on  retiring  the  night 
of  the  5th,  anticipate  a  general  attack  the  next  morning. 
They  took,  doubtless,  the  usual  precautions  against  the 
ordinary  surprise  of  pickets,  grand-guards,  and  outposts,  but 
they  made  no  preparation  for  a  general  battle,  the  more  nec 
essary  as  three  of  the  five  divisions  had  never  been  under  fire, 
and  most  of  them  had  little,  if  any,  drill  in  manoeuvres  or 
loading  and  firing,  and  few  of  the  officers  had  hitherto  heard 
the  thunder  of  an  angry  cannon-shot  or  the  whistle  of  a 

1  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol.  i.,  pp.  467,  468,  476,  483. 


Battle  of  Shiloh  253 

dangerous  bullet.  But  it  may  be  said  the  private  soldiers  of 
the  Confederate  Army  were  likewise  inexperienced  and  illy  dis 
ciplined.  In  a  large  sense  this  was  true,  though  many  more 
of  the  Confederate  regiments  had  been  longer  subjected  to 
drill  and  discipline  than  of  the  Union  regiments,  and  they  had 
great  confidence  in  their  corps  and  division  commanders,  many 
of  whom  had  gained  considerable  celebrity  in  the  Mexican  and 
Indian  wars. 

The  corps  organization  of  the  Confederate  Army,  in  addition 
to  the  division,  gave  more  general  officers  and  greater  com 
pactness  in  the  handling  of  a  large  army.  At  this  time  corps 
were  unknown  in  the  Union  Army.  And  of  still  higher  im 
portance  was  the  fact  that  one  army  came  out  prepared  and 
expecting  battle,  with  all  its  officers  thoroughly  instructed  in 
advance  as  to  what  was  expected,  and  the  other,  without  such 
preparation,  expectancy,  or  instruction,  found  itself  suddenly 
involved  against  superior  numbers  in  what  proved  to  be  the 
greatest  battle  thus  far  fought  on  the  American  continent. 
The  Confederate  hosts  in  the  early  morning  moved  to  battle 
along  their  entire  front  with  the  purpose  of  turning  either  flank 
of  the  imperfectly  connected  Union  divisions,  but  their  efforts 
were,  in  no  substantial  sense,  successful.  The  reckless  and 
impetuous  assaults,  however,  drove  back,  at  first  precipitately, 
then  more  slowly,  the  advance  Union  divisions,  though  at  no 
time  without  fearful  losses  to  the  Confederates.  These  heavy 
losses  made  it  necessary  soon  to  draw  on  the  Confederate 
reserves.  The  Union  commanders  took  advantage  of  the 
undulations  of  the  ground,  and  the  timber,  to  protect  their 
men,  often  posting  a  line  in  the  woods  on  the  edge  of  fields 
to  the  front,  thus  compelling  their  foes  to  advance  over  open 
ground  exposed  to  a  deadly  fire.  The  early  superiority  of  the 
attacking  army  wore  gradually  away,  and  while  it  continued 
to  gain  ground  its  dead  and  wounded  were  numerous  and  close 
behind  it,  causing,  doubtless,  many  to  straggle  or  stop  to  care 
for  their  comrades.  It  has  been  charged  that  much  disorgani 
zation  arose  from  the  pillage  of  the  Union  captured  camps. 
The  divisions  of  Hurlburt  and  \V.  H.  L.  Wallace  were  soon, 


254  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

with  the  reserve  artillery,  actively  engaged,  and,  save  for  a 
brief  period,  about  5  P.M.,  and  immediately  after,  and  in  con 
sequence  of  the  capture  at  that  hour  of  Prentiss  and  about 
2000  of  his  division,  a  continuous  Union  line  from  Owl  Creek 
to  Lick  Creek  or  the  Tennessee  was  maintained  intact,  though 
often  retired. 

In  the  afternoon,  so  desperate  had  grown  the  Confederate 
situation,  and  so  anxious  was  Johnston  to  destroy  the  Union 
Army  before  night  and  reinforcements  came,  that  he  led  a 
brigade  in  person  to  induce  it  to  charge  as  ordered,  during 
which  he  received  a  wound  in  the  leg,  which,  for  want  of 
attention,  shortly  proved  fatal.  To  his  fall  is  attributed  the 
ultimate  Confederate  defeat,  though  his  second,  Beauregard, 
had  written  and  was  familiar  with  the  order  of  battle,  and  had 
then  much  reputation  as  a  field  general.  He  had,  in  part  at 
least,  commanded  at  Bull  Run.  Beauregard  now  assumed 
command,  and  continued  the  attack  persistently  until  night 
came.  No  reinforcements  arrived  for  either  army  in  time  for 
the  Sunday  battle.  Through  some  misunderstanding  of  orders, 
and  without  any  indisposition  on  his  part,  General  Lew  Wal 
lace  did  not  reach  the  battle-field  until  night,  and  after  the 
exhausted  condition  of  the  troops  of  both  armies  had  ended 
the  first  day's  conflict.  The  Army  of  the  Tennessee,  with  a 
principal  division  away,  had  nobly  and  heroically  met  the 
hosts  which  sought  to  overwhelm  it;  some  special  disasters 
had  befallen  portions  of  two  of  its  five  divisions  in  the  battle; 
General  W.  H.  L.  Wallace  was  mortally  wounded,  and  Pren 
tiss  captured,  both  division  commanders;  the  Union  losses  in 
officers  and  men  were  otherwise  great,  probably  reaching  7000 
(first  day  of  the  battle),  yet  when  night  came  the  depleted 
Army  of  the  Tennessee  stood  firmly  at  bay  about  two  miles 
in  rear  of  its  most  advanced  line  of  the  morning.  Colonel 
WTebster,  of  Grant's  staff,  had  massed,  near  and  above  Pitts- 
burg  Landing,  about  twenty  pieces  of  artillery  (pointed  gen 
erally  south  and  southwest)  on  the  crest  of  a  ridge  just  to  the 
north  of  a  deep  ravine  extending  across  the  Union  left  and 
into  the  Tennessee.  Hurlburt's  division  was  next  on  the  right 


Battle  of  Shiloh  255 

of  this  artillery,  extending  westward  almost  at  right  angles 
with  the  river.  A  few  troops  were  placed  between  the  artil 
lery  and  the  river.  The  gunboats  Tyler  and  Lexington,  com 
manded,  respectively,  by  naval  Lieutenants  Grim  and  Shirk, 
were  close  to  the  mouth  of  the  ravine,  and  when  the  last 
desperate  attack  came  their  fire  materially  aided  in  repulsing 
it.  Next  on  Hurlburt's  right  came  McClernand's  division, 
also  extending  westward;  then  Sherman's,  making  almost  a 
right  angle  by  extending  its  right  northward  towards  Snake 
Creek,  to  the  overflowed  lands  and  swamp  just  below  the 
mouth  of  Owl  Creek.  Broken  portions  of  other  divisions  and 
organizations  were  intermixed  in  this  line,  the  three  divisions 
named  being  the  only  ones  on  the  field  still  intact.1  In  this 
position  Grant's  army  received  at  sunset  and  repelled  the  last 
Confederate  assault,  hurling  back,  for  the  last  time  on  that 
memorable  Sunday,  the  assailing  hosts.  Dismayed,  disap 
pointed,  disheartened,  if  not  defeated,  the  Confederate  Army 
was  withdrawn  for  bivouac  for  the  night  to  the  region  of  the 
Union  camps  of  the  morning.  After  firing  had  ceased,  Lew 
Wallace  reached  the  field  on  Sherman's  right. 

It  is  known  that  many  stragglers  appeared  during  the  day 
in  the  rear  of  the  Union  Army,  and  soon  assembled  near  the 
Tennessee  in  considerable  numbers.  The  troops  were  new 
and  undisciplined,  and  it  was  consequently  hard  for  the 
officers  to  maintain  the  organizations  and  keep  the  men  in 
line;  but  it  is  doubtful  whether  the  number  of  stragglers,  con 
sidering  the  character  of  the  battle,  was  greater  than  usual, 
and  they  were  not  greater  than,  if  as  great  as,  in  the  rear  of 
the  Confederate  Army.  An  advancing  and  apparently  success 
ful  army  in  battle  usually  has  comparatively  few  stragglers  in 
the  rear,  but  the  plan  of  fighting  adopted  by  Johnston  and 
Beauregard,  in  masses,  often  in  close  column  by  regiments, 
proved  so  destructive  of  life  as  to  cause  brave  men  to  shrink 
from  the  repeated  attacks. 

However,  the  gallantry  displayed  by  the  attacking  force,  and 

1  For  maps  showing  positions  of  troops  of  each  army  both  days  see  Battles  and 
Leaders,  vol.  i.,  pp.  470,  508. 


Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

the  stubborn  defensive  battle  maintained  by  the  Union  Army, 
have  seldom,  if  ever,  been  excelled  or  equalled  by  veteran 
troops  in  any  war  by  any  race  or  in  any  age. 

Union  officers  of  high  rank  may  perhaps  be  justly  criticised 
for  not  having  been  better  prepared  for  the  battle  by  intrench- 
ments,  concentration,  etc.,  but  certainly  both  officers  and 
soldiers  deserve  high  commendation  for  their  heroic,  bloody, 
and  successful  resistance  after  the  conflict  began.  About 
twenty-five  per  cent,  of  those  actually  engaged  fell  dead  or 
wounded,  and  at  least  a  like  number  of  the  enemy  was  dis 
abled.  Napoleon  fought  no  single  battle  in  one  day  where 
the  proportionate  losses,  dead  and  wounded,  in  either  con 
tending  army  were  so  great ;  and  no  battle  of  modern  times 
shows  so  great  a  proportionate  loss  in  the  numerically  weaker 
army,  which  was  forced  to  retire  steadily  during  an  entire  day, 
and  yet  at  night  was  still  defiantly  standing  and  delivering 
battle,  and  its  commander  giving  orders  to  assume  the  offen 
sive  at  dawn  on  the  morrow. 

Grant  was  not  perfection  as  a  soldier  at  Shiloh,  but  who 
else  would  or  could  have  done  so  well  ?  If  not  a  war  genius, 
he  was  the  personification  of  dogged,  obstinate  persistency, 
never  allowing  a  word  of  discouragement  or  doubt  to  escape 
him  during  the  entire  day,  not  even  to  his  personal  staff, 
though  suffering  excruciating  pain  from  the  recent  injury  from 
the  fall  of  his  horse.  To  him  and  to  the  valor  of  his  officers 
and  soldiers  the  country  owes  much  for  a  timely  victory, 
though  won  at  great  cost  of  life  and  limb.  To  him  and  them 
is  due  praise,  not  blame. 

Thus  far  the  Army  of  tlie  Ohio  is  given  no  credit  for  par 
ticipation  in  the  Sunday  battle.  Buell  and  Nelson's  division 
of  that  army  were  at  Savannah  on  the  evening  pf  the  5th,  but 
Buell  refrained  from  attempting  to  report  his  presence  to  Grant 
until  the  next  morning.  Grant  had  then  departed  for  the 
battle-field.  Grant  was  eating  his  breakfast  at  Savannah  when 
the  battle  opened,  and  at  first  determined  to  find  Buell  before 
going  to  his  army;  but  the  sound  of  guns  was  so  continuous, 
he  felt  that  he  should  not  delay  a  moment,  and  hence  left  a 


Battle  of  Shiloh  257 

note  for  Buell  asking  him  to  hasten  with  his  reinforcements 
to  Pittsburg  Landing,  gave  an  order  for  Nelson  to  march 
at  once,  and  then  proceeded  by  boat  up  the  river.  Buell, 
after  reiterating  Grant's  instructions  to  Nelson  to  march  to 
opposite  the  Landing,  himself  about  noon  proceeded  by 
boat  to  that  place  with  his  chief  of  staff,  Colonel  James  B. 
Fry.' 

Buell  seems  to  have  been  much  impressed  by  the  number 
and  temper  of  the  stragglers  he  saw  on  his  arrival,  and  he  made 
some  inquiry  as  to  Grant's  preparations  for  the  retreat  of  his 
army.  Grant,  learning  Buell  was  on  board  a  steamboat  at  the 
Landing,  sought  him  there,  hastily  explained  the  situation  and 
the  necessity  for  reinforcements,  and  again  departed  for  the 
battle-field.  He  had  before  that  been  in  the  thick  of  the  fight, 
where  his  sword  and  scabbard  had  been  shot  away.  Not  until 
i  or  i. 30  P.M.1  did  the  head  of  Nelson's  column  move,  Ammen's 
brigade  leading,  for  Pittsburg  Landing,  and  then  by  a  swampy 
river  road  over  which  artillery  could  not  be  hauled.  The 
artillery  went  later  by  boat.  At  5  or  6  P.M.  the  advance,— 
eight  companies  of  the  36th  Indiana  (Col.  W.  Grose) — reached 
a  point  on  the  river  opposite  the  Landing.  These  companies 
were  speedily  taken  across  the  Tennessee  in  steamboats  and 
marched  immediately,  less  than  a  quarter  of  a  mile  to  the  left 
of  the  already  massed  artillery,  to  the  support  of  Grant's  army, 
then  engaged  in  its  struggle  to  repel  the  last  assault  of  the 
Confederates  for  the  day.  Other  regiments  (6th  Ohio,  Colo 
nel  N.  L.  Anderson,  24th  Ohio,  Colonel  F.  C.  Jones)  of 
Ammen's  brigade  followed  closely,  but  only  the  36th  Indiana 
participated  in  the  engagement  then  about  spent.  This  regi 
ment  lost  one  man  killed.2  The  expected  arrival  of  the  Army 
of  the  Ohio  and  the  presence  of  such  of  it  as  arrived  may  have 
had  a  good  moral  effect,  but  its  late  coming  gives  to  it  little 
room  to  claim  any  credit  for  the  result  of  the  first  day's 
battle. 

1  General  Ammen's  diary,  Nelson's  and  Ammen's  reports,  War  Records,  vol.  x., 
Part  I.,  pp.  323,  328,  332. 

2  Ammen,  Ibid.,  vol.  x.,  Part  I.,  pp.  334,  337. 

VOL.  I.— 17. 


258  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

As  always,  those  who  only  see  the  rear  of  an  army  during  a 
battle  gain  from  the  sight  and  statements  of  the  demoralized 
stragglers  exaggerated  notions  of  the  condition  and  situation 
of  those  engaged.  That  Grant's  army  was  in  danger,  and  in 
sore  need  of  reinforcements,  cannot  be  doubted.  That  the 
Confederate  Army  had  been  fearfully  punished  in  the  first  day's 
fighting  is  certain.  Beauregard  reports  that  he  could  not,  on 
Monday,  bring  20,000  men  into  action  ' — less  than  half  the 
number  Johnston  had  when  the  battle  began.  The  arrival  of 
Nelson  and  Lew  Wallace's  divisions  six  hours  earlier  would 
have  given  a  different  aspect,  probably,  to  the  first  day's 
battle.  The  Army  of  the  Ohio  was  then  composed,  generally, 
of  better  equipped,  better  disciplined  and  older  troops,  though 
unused  to  battle,  than  the  majority  of  those  of  the  Army  of 
the  Tennessee. 

Though  night  had  come,  dark  and  rainy,  when  the  four 
divisions  of  Buell's  army  reached  the  west  bank  of  the  Tennes 
see,  and  Lew  Wallace's  division  arrived  on  the  right,  Grant 
directed  the  ground  in  front  to  be  examined  and  the  whole 
army  to  be  put  in  readiness  to  assume  the  offensive  at  day 
break  next  morning.  Wallace  was  pushed  forward  on  the 
extreme  right  above  the  mouth  of  Owl  Creek,  and  Sherman, 
McClernand,  and  Hurlburt,  in  the  order  named,  on  Wallace's 
left,  then  McCook  (A.  McD),2  Crittenden  (Thomas  T.),  and 
Nelson  (Win.)  were  assigned  positions  in  the  order  named, 
from  Hurlburt  to  the  left,  Nelson  on  the  extreme  left,  well 
out  towards  Lick  Creek ;  all  advanced  (save  McCook)  during 
the  night  a  considerable  distance  from  the  position  of  the 
Army  of  the  Tennessee  at  the  close  of  the  battle.3 

Buell's  artillery  arrived  and  went  into  battery  during  the 
night.  General  George  H.  Thomas'  division  and  one  brigade 
of  General  Thomas  J.  Wood's  division  did  not  arrive  in  time 
for  the  battle.  There  were  present,  commanding  brigades  in 

1  War  Records,  vol.  x.,  Part  I.,  p.  391  (398). 

2  McCook  did  not  arrive  until  early  on  the  yth.      War  Records,  vol.  x.,  Part  I., 
P.  293. 

3  Official  map,  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol.  i.,  p.  508. 


Battle  of  Shiloh  259 

the  Army  of  the  Ohio,  Brigadier-Generals  Lovell  H.  Rous 
seau,  J.  T.  Boyle,  Colonels  Jacob  Ammen,  W.  Sooy  Smith, 
W.  N.  Kirk  (34th  Illinois),  and  William  H.  Gibson  (49th 
Ohio).  These  Colonels  became,  later,  general  officers. 

Soon  after  5  o'clock  in  the  morning  the  entire  Union  Army 
went  forward,  gaining  ground  steadily  until  6  A.M.,  when  the 
strong  lines  of  Beauregard's  army  with  his  artillery  in  position 
were  reached,  and  the  battle  became  general  and  raged  with 
more  or  less  fury  throughout  the  greater  part  of  the  day,  and 
until  the  Confederate  Army  was  beaten  back  at  all  points,  with 
the  loss  of  some  guns  and  prisoners,  besides  killed  and  wounded. 
The  last  stand  of  the  enemy  was  made  about  3  P.M.  in  front  of 
Sherman's  camp  preceding  the  first  day's  battle.  Both  Grant 
and  Buell  accompanied  the  troops,  often  personally  directing 
the  attacks,  as  did  division  and  brigade  commanders.  Grant, 
late  in  the  day,  near  Shiloh  Church,  rode  with  a  couple  of  regi 
ments  to  the  edge  of  a  clearing  and  ordered  them  to  ' '  Charge. 
They  responded  with  a  yell  and  a  run  across  the  opening, 
causing  the  enemy  to  break  and  disperse.  This  practically 
ended  the  two  days'  memorable  battle  at  the  old  log  church 
where  it  began.1 

The  Confederate  Army  of  the  Mississippi  which  came,  but 
four  days  before,  so  full  of  hope  and  confidence,  from  its  in 
trenched  camp  at  Corinth,  was  soon  in  precipitate  retreat.  Its 
commander  was  dead ;  many  of  its  best  officers  were  killed  or 
wounded;  its  columns  were  broken  and  demoralized;  much 
of  its  material  was  gone ;  hope  and  confidence  were  dissipated, 
yet  it  maintained  an  orderly  retreat  to  its  fortifications  at 
Corinth.  Beauregard  claimed  for  it  some  sort  of  a  victory.2 

From  Monterey,  on  the  8th  of  April,  Beauregard  addressed 
Grant  a  note  saying  that  in  consequence  of  the  exhausted 
condition  of  his  forces  by  the  extraordinary  length  of  the 
battle,  he  had  withdrawn  them  from  the  conflict,  and  asking 
permission  to  send  a  mounted  party  to  the  battle-field  to  bury 
the  dead,  to  be  accompanied  by  certain  gentlemen  desiring  to 

1  Grant's  Memoirs,  vol.  i.,  p.  351. 

2  War  Records,  vol.  x.,  Part  II.,  pp.  384-5,  424,  482  (407-8). 


260  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

remove  the  bodies  of  their  sons  and  friends.  To  this  Grant 
responded  that,  owing  to  the  warmth  of  the  weather,  he  had 
caused  the  dead  of  both  sides  to  be  buried  immediately.1 

The  total  losses,  both  days,  in  the  Army  of  the  Tennessee, 
were  87  officers  and  1426  enlisted  men  killed,  336  officers  and 
6265  enlisted  men  wounded,  total  killed  and  wounded  8114. 
The  captured  and  missing  were  115  officers  and  2318  men, 
total  2433,  aggregate  casualties,  10,547.' 

The  total  losses  in  the  Army  of  the  Ohio  were  17  officers 
and  224  privates  killed,  92  officers  and  1715  privates  wounded, 
total  2048.  The  captured  were  55.'  The  grand  total  of  the 
two  Union  armies  killed,  wounded,  captured,  or  missing, 
12,650. 

The  first  reports  of  casualties  are  usually  in  part  estimated, 
and  not  accurate  for  want  of  full  information.  The  foregoing 
statement  of  losses  is  given  from  revised  lists.  Grant's  state 
ment  of  losses  does  not  materially  differ  from  the  above.2 

The  losses  of  the  Confederate  Army  in  the  two  days'  battle, 
as  stated  in  Beauregard's  report  of  April  nth,  were,  killed 
1728,  wounded  8012;  total  killed  and  wounded,  9740,  missing 
959,  grand  total,  10,699.'  Grant  claimed  that  Beauregard's 
report  was  inaccurate,  as  above  1728  were  buried,  by  actual 
count,  in  front  of  Sherman's  and  McClernand's  divisions 
alone.  The  burial  parties  estimated  the  number  killed  at 
4000. 2 

Besides  Johnston,  the  army  commander,  there  were  many 
Confederate  officers  killed  and  wounded.  Hon.  George  W. 

o 

Johnson,  then  assuming  to  act  as  (Confederate)  Provisional 
Governor  of  Kentucky,  was  killed  while  fighting  in  the  ranks 
on  the  second  day;  General  Gladden  was  killed  the  first  day, 
and  Generals  Cheatham,  Clark,  Hindman,  B.  R.  Johnson,  and 
Bowen  were  wounded. 

Thenceforth  during  the  war  there  was  little  boasting  of  the 
superior  fighting  qualities  of  Southern  over  Northern  soldiers. 
Both  armies  fought  with  a  courage  creditable  to  their  race  and 

1  War  Records,  vol.  x.,  Part  I.,  pp.  in,  105,  108,  391. 
9  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol.  i.,  p.  485. 


Capture  of  Island  No.  10  261 

nationality.  Americans  may  always  be  relied  upon  to  do  this 
when  well  commanded.  I  have  already  taken  more  space 
than  I  originally  intended  in  giving  the  salient  features  of  the 
battle  of  Shiloh,  and  I  cannot  now  pursue  the  campaign  further 
than  to  say  General  Halleck  arrived  at  Pittsburg  Landing 
April  nth,  and  assumed  command,  for  the  first  and  only  time 
in  the  field.  He  soon  drew  to  him  a  third  army  (Army  of 
the  Mississippi),  about  30,000  strong,  under  General  John 
Pope. 

Island  No.  10,  in  the  bend  of  the  Mississippi  above  New 
Madrid,  was  occupied  early  by  the  Confederates  with  a  strong 
force,  well  fortified,  with  the  hope  that  it  could  be  held  and 
thus  close  the  Mississippi  River  against  the  Union  forces  from 
the  North.  Early  after  Fort  Donelson  was  taken,  Flag  Officer 
Foote  took  his  fleet  of  gunboats  into  the  Mississippi,  and  in 
conjunction  with  the  army  under  General  John  Pope  sought 
the  capture  of  the  island.  Pope  moved  about  20,000  men  to 
Point  Pleasant,  on  the  west  bank  of  the  river,  March  6,  1862, 
which  compelled  the  Confederates,  on  the  I4th,  to  evacuate 
New  Madrid,  on  the  same  side  of  the  river,  about  ten  miles 
above  Point  Pleasant  and  the  same  distance  below  the  island. 
Pope  cut,  or  " sawed,"  a  canal  from  a  point  above  Island  No. 
10  through  a  wood  to  Wilson's  and  St.  John's  Bayou,  leading 
to  New  Madrid.1  The  position  of  the  Confederates  was  still 
so  strong  with  their  batteries  and  redoubts  on  the  eastern  shore 
of  the  river  that  Pope  with  his  army  alone  could  not  take  it. 
Attacks  were  made  with  the  gunboats  from  the  north,  but  they 
failed  to  dislodge  the  enemy.  Foote,  though  requested  by 
Pope,  did  not  think  it  possible  for  a  gunboat  to  steam  past  the 
batteries  and  go  to  the  assistance  of  the  army  at  Point  Pleasant. 
With  the  assistance  of  gunboats  Pope  could  cross  his  army  to 
the  east  side  and  thus  cut  off  all  supplies  for  the  Confederate 
Army  on  the  island.  Captain  Henry  Walke,  U.S.N.,  having 
expressed  a  willingness  to  attempt  to  pass  the  island  and  bat 
teries  with  the  Carondelet,  was  given  orders  to  do  so.  He 
accordingly  made  ready,  taking  on  board  Captain  Hottenstein 

1  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol.  i.,  p.  460. 


262  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

and  twenty-three  sharpshooters  of  the  426  Illinois.  The  sailors 
were  all  armed ;  hand-grenades  were  placed  within  reach,  and 
hose  were  attached  to  the  boilers  for  throwing  scalding  water 
to  drive  off  boarding  parties.  Thus  prepared,  the  Carondelet, 
on  the  night  of  April  4th,  "  in  the  black  shadow  of  a  thunder 
storm,"  safely  passed  the  island  and  batteries.  It  was  fired  on, 
but  reached  New  Madrid  without  the  loss  of  a  man.  The 
Pittsburg,  under  Lieutenant-Commander  Thompson,  in  like 
manner  ran  the  gauntlet  without  injury,  also  in  a  thunder 
storm,  April  /th.  These  two  gunboats  the  same  day  attacked 
successfully  the  Confederate  batteries  on  the  east  shore  and 
covered  the  crossing  of  Pope's  army.  Seeing  that  escape  was 
not  possible,  the  garrison  on  the  island  surrendered  to  Flag 
Officer  Foote  on  April  /th,  the  same  day  the  Confederates 
were  driven  from  the  field  of  Shiloh.  Pope  pursued  and  cap 
tured,  on  the  morning  of  the  8th,  nearly  all  the  retreating 
troops.  General  W.  W.  Mackall,  commanding  at  Island  No. 
10,  and  two  other  general  officers,  over  5000  men,  20  pieces 
of  heavy  artillery,  7000  stand  of  arms,  and  quantities  of  am 
munition  and  provisions  were  taken  without  the  loss  of  a  Union 
soldier.1 

Not  until  April  3<Dth  did  Halleck's  army  move  on  Corinth. 
Grant,  though  nominally  in  command  of  the  right  wing,  was 
little  more  than  an  observer,  as  orders  were  not  even  sent 
through  him  to  that  wing.  For  thirty  days  Halleck  moved 
and  intrenched,  averaging  not  to  exceed  two  thirds  of  a  mile 
a  day,  until  he  entered  Corinth,  May  3Oth,  to  find  it  com 
pletely  evacuated.  He  commenced  at  once  to  build  fortifica 
tions  for  100,000  men.  But  the  dispersion  of  this  grand  army 
soon  commenced;  the  Army  of  the  Ohio  (Buell's)  was  sent 
east  along  the  line  of  the  Memphis  and  Charleston  Railroad, 
with  orders  to  repair  the  road  as  it  proceeded.  We  shall  soon 
meet  this  army  and  narrate  its  future  movements  to  the  Ohio 
River — in  retreat  after  Bragg's  army. 

Grant,  chafing  under  his  treatment,  on  Corinth  being  oc 
cupied,  at  his  own  request  was  relieved  from  any  duty  in 

1  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol.  i.,  pp.  446,  etc. 


Capture  of  Island  No.  10  263 

Halleck's  department.  Later,  on  Sherman's  advice,  he  de 
cided  to  remain,  but  to  transfer  his  headquarters  to  Memphis, 
to  which  place  he  started,  June  2ist,  on  horseback  with  a 
small  escort. 

Halleck  was,  July  n,  1862,  notified  of  his  own  appointment 
to  the  command  of  all  the  armies,  with  headquarters  at  Wash 
ington.  Grant  was  therefore  recalled  to  Corinth  again.  He 
reached  that  place  and  took  command,  July  I5th,  Halleck  de 
parting  two  days  later,  never  again  to  take  the  field  in  person. 
The  latter  was  not  under  fire  during  the  war,  nor  did  he  ever 
command  an  army  in  battle.  We  here  leave  Grant  and  his 
brilliant  career  in  the  West.  We  shall  speak  of  him  soon 
again,  and  still  later  when  in  command  of  all  the  armies  of  the 
Union  (Halleck  included),  but  with  headquarters  in  the  field 
with  the  Army  of  the  Potomac. 


CHAPTER  VII 

MITCHEL'S  CAMPAIGN  TO  NORTHERN  ALABAMA — ANDREWS' 
RAID  INTO  GEORGIA,  AND  CAPTURE  OF  A  LOCOMOTIVE 

— AFFAIR  AT  BRIDGEPORT — SACKING  OF  ATHENS,  ALA 
BAMA,  AND  COURT-MARTIAL  OF  COLONEL  TURCHIN — 
BURNING  OF  PAINT  ROCK  BY  COLONEL  BEATTY — OTHER 
INCIDENTS  AND  PERSONAL  MENTION — MITCHEL  RE 
LIEVED 

GENERAL  MITCHEL'S  division  (to  which  I  belonged) 
of  the  Army  of  the  Ohio  we  left  at  Nashville,  ready  to 
move  on  an  independent  line.  When  the  other  di 
visions  had  started  for  Savannah,  Mitchel,  March  18,  1862, 
resumed  his  march  southward,  encamping  the  first  night  at 
Lavergne,  fifteen  miles  from  Nashville.  The  next  day  we 
marched  on  a  road  leading  by  old  cotton  fields,  and  felt  we 
were  in  the  heart  of  the  slaveholding  South.  The  slaves  were 
of  an  apparently  different  type  from  those  in  Kentucky,  though 
still  of  many  shades  of  color,  varying  from  pure  African  black 
to  oily-white.  The  eye,  in  many  instances,  had  to  be  resorted 
to,  to  decide  whether  there  was  any  black  blood  in  them.  But 
these  negroes  were  shrewd,  and  had  the  idea  of  liberty  upper 
most  in  their  minds.  They  had  heard  that  the  Northern  army 
was  coming  to  make  them  free.  Their  masters  had  probably 
talked  of  this  in  their  hearing.  They  believed  the  time  for 
their  freedom  had  come.  Untutored  as  they  all  were,  they 
understood  somehow  they  were  the  cause  of  the  war.  As  our 
column  advanced,  regardless  of  sex,  and  in  families,  they 
abandoned  the  fields  and  their  homes,  turning  their  backs  on 

264 


MAJOR-GENERAL    O.   M.    MITCHEL. 
{FrfJin  a  photograph  taken  2862.) 


Mitchel  in  Northern  Alabama  265 

master  and  mistress,  many  bearing  their  bedding,  clothing, 
and  other  effects  on  their  heads  and  backs,  and  came  to  the 
roadsides,  shouting  and  singing  a  medley  of  songs  of  freedom 
and  religion,  confidently  expecting  to  follow  the  army  to  im 
mediate  liberty.  Their  numbers  were  so  great  we  marched 
for  a  good  part  of  a  day  between  almost  continuous  lines  of 
them.  Their  disappointment  was  sincere  and  deep  when  told 
they  must  return  to  their  homes:  that  the  Union  Army  could 
not  take  them.  Of  course  some  never  returned,  but  the  mass 
of  them  did,  and  remained  until  the  final  decree  of  the  war  was 
entered  and  their  chains  fell  off,  never  to  be  welded  in  America 
on  their  race  again.  They  shouted  "  Glory  "  on  seeing  the 
Stars  and  Stripes,  as  though  it  had  been  a  banner  of  protection 
and  liberty,  instead  of  the  emblem  of  a  power  which  hitherto 
had  kept  them  and  their  ancestors  in  bondage.  The  "old 
flag"  has  a  peculiar  charm  for  those  who  have  served  under 
it.  It  was  noticeable  that  wherever  we  marched  in  the  South, 
particularly  in  Kentucky,  Tennessee,  and  Virginia,  we  found 
men  at  the  roadside  who  had  fought  in  the  Mexican  War, 
often  with  tears  streaming  down  their  cheeks,  who  professed 
sincere  loyalty  to  the  flag  and  the  Union. 

We  reached  Murfreesboro  on  the  2Oth  without  a  fight,  the 
small  Confederate  force  retiring  and  destroying  bridges  as  we 
advanced. 

The  division  was  kept  busy  in  repairing  the  railroad,  and 
especially  in  rebuilding  the  recently  destroyed  railroad  bridge 
near  Murfreesboro  across  Stone's  River.  I  worked  indus 
triously  in  charge  of  a  detail  of  soldiers  on  this  bridge.  In  ten 
days  it  was  rebuilt,  though  the  heavy  timbers  had  to  be  cut 
and  hewed  from  green  timber  in  the  nearby  woods.  The 
Union  Army  never  called  in  vain  for  expert  mechanics,  civil  or 
locomotive  engineers. 

I  took  a  train  of  ninety  wagons,  starting  to  Nashville  on  the 
3 ist,  for  quartermaster,  commissary,  and  ordnance  supplies, 
with  instructions  to  repair,  while  on  the  way,  broken  places  in 
the  railroad.  In  consequence  of  the  destruction  of  bridges 
the  train  and  guard  had  to  travel  a  longer  route  than  the  direct 


266  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

one,  making  the  distance  above  forty  miles.  We  repaired  the 
railroad,  and  reached  Nashville  and  loaded  the  wagons  by  the 
evening  of  the  second  day.  The  city  was  a  demoralizing  place 
for  soldiers.  A  few  of  my  men  of  the  loth  Ohio  became  drunk, 
and  while  I  was  engaged  in  the  night  trying  to  move  the  train 
and  guard  out  of  the  city,  some  one  threw  a  stone  which  struck 
me  in  the  back  of  the  head,  cutting  the  scalp  and  causing  it  to 
bleed  freely.  I  got  the  train  under  way  about  midnight,  and 
then  searched  for  a  surgeon,  but  at  that  hour  could  find  none. 
Knowing  that  Mrs.  McMeans,  the  wife  of  the  surgeon  of  the 
3d  Ohio,  was  at  the  City  Hotel,  I  had  her  called,  and  she  per 
formed  the  necessary  surgery,  and  stopped  the  flow  of  blood. 
Long  before  sunrise  my  train  was  far  on  the  road,  and  by 
8  P.M.  of  the  2d  of  April  it  was  safely  in  our  camps  at  Mur- 
freesboro.  It  was  attacked  near  Lavergne  by  some  irregular 
cavalry,  or  guerrillas,  but  they  were  easily  driven  off.  Such 
troops  did  not,  as  a  rule,  care  to  fight.  The  conduct  of  a 
supply-train  through  a  country  infested  by  them  is  attended 
with  much  responsibility  and  danger,  and  requires  much  energy 
and  skill. 

Mitchel,  being  now  supplied,  marched  south,  April  3d,  and 
we  reached  Shelbyville  the  next  day — a  town  famed  for  its 
great  number  of  Union  people.  Loyalty  seemed  there  to  be 
the  rule,  not  the  exception.  The  Union  flag  was  displayed 
on  the  road  to  and  at  Shelbyville  by  influential  people.  Our 
bands  played  as  we  entered  the  town,  and  there  were  many 
manifestations  of  joy  over  our  coming.  This  is  the  only  place 
in  the  South  where  I  witnessed  such  a  reception.  I  recall 
among  those  who  welcomed  us  the  names  of  Warren,  Gurnie, 
Story,  Cooper,  and  Weasner, 

While  here  Colonel  John  Kennett,  with  a  part  of  his  4th 
Ohio  Cavalry,  made  a  raid  south  and  captured  a  train  on  the 
Nashville  and  Chattanooga  Railroad  and  some  fifteen  prisoners. 

A  short  time  before  we  reached  Shelbyville,  Mitchel  sent  a 
party  of  eight  soldiers,  in  disguise,  under  the  leadership  of  a 
citizen  of  Kentucky,  known  as  Captain  J.  J.  Andrews,  to 
enter  the  Confederate  lines  and  proceed  via  Chattanooga  to 


Andrews'  Raid — Capturing  a  Locomotive    267 

Atlanta,  with  some  vague  idea  of  capturing  a  train  of  cars  or 
a  locomotive  and  escaping  with  it,  burning  the  bridges  behind 
them.  This  party  reached  its  destination,  but  for  want  of  an 
engineer  who  had  promised  to  join  it  at  Atlanta,  the  plan  was 
abandoned,  and  each  of  the  party  returned  in  safety,  joining 
their  respective  regiments  at  Shelbyville.  Andrews,  still  de 
siring  to  carry  out  the  plan,  organized  a  second  party,  com 
posed  of  himself  and  another  citizen  of  Kentucky,  Wm. 
Campbell,  and  twenty-four  soldiers,  detailed  from  Ohio  regi 
ments,  seven  from  the  2d,  eight  from  the  33d,  and  nine  from 
the  21st.1  This  party  started  from  Shelbyville,  Monday  night, 
April  7,  1862,  disguised  as  citizens,  professing  to  be  driven 
from  their  homes  in  Kentucky  by  the  Union  Army  and  going 
South  to  join  the  Confederate  Army.  They  were  to  travel 
singly  or  in  couples  over  roads  not  frequented  by  either  army, 
but  such  as  were  usually  taken  by  real  Kentucky  refugees  to 
Chattanooga  or  some  station  where  passage  on  cars  could  be 
taken  to  Marietta,  Georgia,  where  the  whole  party  were  to  as 
semble  in  four  days  ready  to  take  a  train  northward  the  fol 
lowing  (Friday)  morning.  Each  man  was  furnished  by 
Andrews  with  an  abundance  of  Confederate  money  to  pay 
bills.  It  was  understood  that  if  any  were  suspected  and  in 
danger  of  capture  they  were  to  enlist  in  the  Southern  army 
until  an  opportunity  for  escape  presented.  Mitchel,  it  was 
known  to  Andrews  and  his  party,  was  to  start  tor  Huntsville, 
Alabama,  in  a  day  or  two,  and  Andrews  hoped  to  be  able  to 
escape  with  his  captured  train  through  Chattanooga,  thence 
west  over  the  Memphis  and  Charleston  Railroad,  and  join 
Mitchel  at  some  point  east  of  Huntsville. 

The  distance  was  too  great  for  all  the  party  to  reach  their 
destination  before  Friday,  and  on  the  way  Andrews  managed 
to  notify  most  of  his  men  that  the  enterprise  would  not  be 
undertaken  until  Saturday.  About  midnight  of  the  iithof 
April  the  members  reached  Marietta,  and,  with  two  excep 
tions,  spent  the  night  at  a  small  hotel  near  the  depot.  Big 
Shanty  (where  passengers  on  the  early  morning  train  were 

1  Pittenger,  Capturing  a  Locomotive  ^  pp.  26,  40. 


268  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

allowed  to  take  breakfast),  north  of  Marietta,  was  the  place 
where  the  party  proposed  to  seize  the  locomotive  and  such 
part  of  the  train  as  might  seem  practicable,  the  engineer 
(Brown)  of  the  party  to  run  it  north,  stopping  at  intervals 
only  long  enough  to  cut  telegraph  wires,  to  prevent  informa 
tion  being  sent  ahead,  tear  up  short  portions  of  the  track 
to  prevent  pursuit,  and  to  burn  bridges,  the  latter  being 
the  principal  object  of  the  raid.  Porter  and  Hawkins  of  the 
party,  who  had  lodging  at  a  different  hotel  from  the  others, 
were  not  awakened  in  time,  and  consequently  did  not  partici 
pate  in  the  daring  act  for  which  the  party  was  organized. 

During  the  night  Andrews  carefully  instructed  those  at  his 
hotel,  each  man  being  told  what  was  expected  of  him.  The 
party  were  almost  to  a  man  strangers  to  him  until  five  days 
before,  and  hardly  two  of  them,  though  of  the  same  regiment, 
until  then  knew  each  other.  Never  before,  for  so  extraordi 
nary  an  attempt,  was  so  incongruous  a  band  assembled.  I 
knew  one  of  them — Sergeant-Major  Marion  A.  Ross,  of  the 
2d  Ohio.  He  had  no  previous  training,  and  no  special  skill  for 
such  an  expedition.  He  was  a  farmer  boy  (Champaign  Co., 
Ohio)  of  more  than  ordinary  retiring  modesty,  with  no  element 
of  reckless  daring  in  his  nature.  He  had  almost  white  silky 
flaxen  hair,  and  at  Antioch  College,  where  I  first  met  him, 
he  rarely  associated  with  his  schoolmates  in  play  or  amuse 
ment.  He  was  called  a  ladies'  man;  and  this  because  he  did 
not  care  for  the  active  pursuits  usually  enjoyed  by  young  men. 

It  is  said  that  when  Ross  ascertained  the  number  of  trains, 
regular  and  irregular,  with  which  the  exigencies  of  war  had 
covered  the  railroad,  and  considered  also  the  distance  to  be 
passed  over,  he  tried  at  the  last  moment  to  dissuade  Andrews 
from  undertaking  the  execution  of  the  enterprise.  In  this  he 
failed,  but  Andrews  gave  any  of  the  party  who  regarded  the 
design  too  hazardous  the  right  to  withdraw.1  Not  one,  how 
ever,  availed  himself  of  this  liberty.  Ross  saw  that  the  scheme 
must  fail,  but  was  too  manly  to  abandon  his  comrades. 

Saturday  morning  before  daylight  the  party  was  seated  in 

1  Capturing  a  Locomotive,  pp.  66-8. 


Andrews'  Raid — Capturing  a  Locomotive    269 

one  passenger  car,  moving  north.  In  this  and  other  coaches 
there  were  several  hundred  passengers.1  At  sunrise,  when 
eight  miles  from  Marietta,  the  train  stopped,  and  the  train 
men  shouted:  "  Big  Shanty — twenty  minutes  for  breakfast." 
At  this,  conductor,  engineer,  fireman,  and  train-hands,  with 
most  of  the  passengers,  left  the  train.  Thus  the  desired  op 
portunity  of  Andrews  and  his  party  was  presented.  They  did 
not  hesitate.  Three  cars  back  from  the  tender,  including  only 
box-cars,  the  coupling-pin  was  drawn,  and  the  passenger  cars 
cut  off.  Andrews  mounted  the  engine,  with  Brown  and 
Knight  as  engineers  and  Wilson  as  fireman.  Others  took 
places  as  brakesmen,  or  as  helpers  and  guards,  and,  to  the 
amazement  of  the  bystanders,  the  locomotive  moved  rapidly 
north.  The  conductor,  engineer,  and  train-men  were  dazed. 
The  capture  was  accomplished,  but  how  were  the  trains  and 
the  stations  to  be  passed  on  the  long  journey  to  Chattanooga; 
and  how  was  that  place  to  be  passed,  and  still  a  run  of  a  hun 
dred  miles  made  over  the  Memphis  and  Charleston  Railroad 
before  they  were  within  the  Union  lines  at  Huntsville  ?  The 
train  proceeded  only  a  short  distance  when  it  was  stopped  and 
the  telegraph  wires  cut,  then  it  moved  on  again,  stopping  now 
and  then  long  enough  to  enable  Andrews  and  his  men  to  tear 
up  the  track  behind  them.  They  reached  Kingston,  thirty- 
two  miles  north,  where  a  stop  had  to  be  made,  but  by  claim 
ing  their  train  was  a  powder  train  hastening  to  Beauregard's 
army,  they  were  allowed  to  pass  on ;  so  the  flight  continued 
until  Dalton  and  the  tunnel  north  of  it  were  passed.  The  con 
ductor,  Fuller,  started  from  Big  Shanty  with  a  small  party  on 
foot,  then  procured  a  hand-car  and  at  Dalton  a  locomotive. 
His  pursuit  was  both  energetic  and  intelligent.  At  Dalton 
he  succeeded  in  getting  a  telegram  through  to  Chattanooga 
giving  notice  of  the  coming  of  the  raiders.  The  locomotive 
seized,  known  as  General,  proved  a  poor  one,  and  fuel  soon 
gave  out,  and  finally  the  pursuers  came  in  sight.  Cars  were 
dropped  and  bridges  were  fired,  but  the  pursuers  pushed  the 
cars  ahead  and  put  out  the  flames.  At  last,  not  far  from 

1  Capturing  a  Locomotive,  pp.  66—8. 


270  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

Chattanooga,  the  General  was  abandoned,  and  the  raiders 
scattered  to  ttie  woods  and,  generally  singly,  sought  to  evade 
capture  ;  but  as  the  whole  country  was  aroused  and  Confederate 
soldiers  were  at  hand,  most  of  the  party  were  soon  captured ; 
one  or  two  evaded  discovery  by  going  boldly  to  recruiting 
stations  and  enlisting  in  the  Confederate  Army.  The  history 
of  the  suffering,  trials,  and  fate  of  this  daring  band  is  one  of 
the  most  thrilling  and  tragic  of  the  war.  It  is  too  long  to  be 
here  told.  The  captured  were  imprisoned  at  Chattanooga, 
and  Andrews,  the  leader  (after  making  one  attempt  to  escape), 
was  heavily  ironed,  and  a  scaffold  was  prepared  at  Chattanooga 
for  his  execution,  but  for  some  reason  he  and  his  companions 
were  transferred  to  Atlanta,  where,  on  the  day  of  their  arrival, 
he  was  taken  to  a  scaffold  and  hung,  and  his  body  buried  in 
an  unmarked  and  still  unknown  grave.1  He  died  bravely, 
resigned  to  his  fate.  He  was  a  man  of  quiet  demeanor,  of 
extraordinary  resolution,  and  more  than  ordinary  ability.  He 
was  tried  and  sentenced  by  a  sort  of  drum-head  court-martial, 
charged  with  being  disloyal  to  the  Confederacy  and  hanged  as 
a  spy.1  Other  men  of  more  fame  have  died  on  the  gallows,  and 
others  of  less  merit  have  occupied  high  positions. 

Seven  of  the  band  were  taken  to  Knoxville,  and  in  June, 
1862,  tried  by  court-martial  and  condemned  to  be  hanged  as 
spies.  Campbell,  Wilson,  Ross,  Shadrack,  Slaven,  Robinson, 
and  Scott  were  hanged  June  i8th,  by  order  of  General  E. 
Kirby  Smith,  at  Atlanta.1  Their  bodies  were  buried  in  a  rude 
trench  at  the  foot  of  the  scaffold.  A  grateful  government  has 
caused  this  trench  to  be  opened  and  the  mortal  remains  of 
these  unfortunate  heroes  of  cruel  war  to  be  removed  to  the 
beautiful  National  Cemetery  near  Chattanooga  and  buried 
amidst  the  heroes  of  Chickamauga,  there  to  rest  until  the 
Grand  Army  of  Soldier-dead  shall  be  summoned  to  rise  on  the 
resurrection  morn. 

Eight  others,  Brown,  Knight,  Porter,  Wood,  Wilson,  Haw 
kins,  Wallam,  and  Dorsey,  after  suffering  more  than  the  pangs 
of  death  in  prison,  in  various  ways  and  at  different  times 

1  Capturing  a  Locomotive,  pp.  204-5,  J82,  224,  353. 


Personal  Mention  and  Incidents  271 

escaped;  and  after  like  suffering,  six  others,  Parrot,  Buffem, 
Bensinger,  Reddick,  Mason,  and  Pittenger  were  (March,  1863) 
exchanged.  These  fourteen  were,  save  Wood  and  Buffem, 
living  in  1881,  honored  and  upright  citizens.  Pittenger  was  a 
member  of  the  New  Jersey  Methodist  Episcopal  Conference, 
and  the  author  of  Capturing  a  Locomotive,  in  which  is  given  the 
story  of  the  tragic  affair  in  all  its  painful  details. 

Mitchel's  division  resumed  its  march  southward  April  Qth, 
and  reached  Fayetteville  the  next  day;  two  brigades — Tur- 
chin's  and  Sill's — continued  the  march  towards  Huntsville  on 
the  Memphis  and  Charleston  Railroad.  At  Fayetteville  the 
inhabitants  seemed  to  be  wholly  disloyal,  and  extended  no 
welcome.  Huntsville  was  surprised  and  captured  before  day 
light  on  April  nth.  A  large  number  of  cars  and  fifteen  loco 
motives  were  taken.1  One  train  was  found  at  the  depot  loaded 
with  recruits  for  Beauregard's  army  at  Corinth.  Many  Con 
federates  who  had  been  wounded  at  Shiloh  were  captured  and 
paroled.  The  next  day,  at  Stevenson,  five  more  locomotives 
and  a  large  amount  of  rolling  stock  were  taken.1 

The  only  instance  witnessed  by  me  during  the  war  of  a  body 
of  soldiers  refusing  to  obey  orders  was  of  the  loth  Ohio  when 
it  was  ordered  at  Fayetteville  to  prepare  to  march,  each  man 
carrying  his  knapsack.  On  some  occasions  prior  to  this  time 
the  company  wagons  carried  the  knapsacks  of  the  men.  Colo 
nel  Wm.  H.  Lytle  (then  commanding  a  brigade),  being  greatly 
chagrined  and  enraged  at  the  insubordination  of  his  regiment, 
ordered  a  section  of  a  battery  pointed  on  it,  took  out  his 
watch,  and  gave  the  men  two  minutes  to  take  up  their  knap 
sacks  and  be  ready  to  march.  The  order  was  obeyed  com- 
plainingly,  and  the  incident  was  not  again  repeated.  This 
regiment  was  a  good  one,  and  later  it  was  distinguished  for 
valor  and  good  soldierly  conduct. 

As  we  proceeded  south  into  the  cotton  regions,  the  slaves 
were  more  numerous  and  still  flocked  to  the  roadsides,  seeking 
and  desiring  to  follow  the  army.  All  believed  the  "  Yankee 
army  "  had  come  solely  to  free  them. 

1  War  Records,  vol.  x.,  Part  I.,  p.  641  ;   Part  II.,  p.  104. 


272  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

Colonel  John  Beatty  was  made  Provost-Marshal  and  Presi 
dent  of  a  Board  of  Administration  for  Huntsville. 

Huntsville  was  a  beautiful,  aristocratic  little  Southern  city. 
A  feature  of  it  was  a  large  spring  near  its  centre  which  fur 
nished  an  abundant  supply  of  water  for  the  men  and  animals 
of  a  large  army.  It  was  the  home  of  the  Alabama  Clays,  all 
disloyal;  of  ex-Senator  Jerry  Clemens,  who  had  early  been  a 
Union  man,  but  later  was  disposed  to  accept  secession  as  an 
accomplished  fact;  then,  on  the  Union  occupancy  of  Northern 
Alabama,  he  boldly  advocated  a  restoration  of  the  State  to 
the  Union.  Colonel  Nick  Davis,  likewise  an  original  Union 
man,  at  first  opposed  secession ;  then,  after  Bull  Run,  accepted 
a  colonelcy  in  an  Alabama  rebel  regiment;  then  declined  it, 
and  thereafter  tried  to  remain  loyal  to  the  Union.  The  con 
duct  of  such  strong  men  as  Clemens  and  Davis  is  not  to  be 
wondered  at  when  their  surroundings  are  considered.  There 
were  many  who,  feeling  bound  to  continue  their  residence  in 
the  South,  and  believing,  after  Bull  Run,  that  the  Confederacy 
was  established,  yielded  their  opposition  to  it. 

Reverend  Frederick  A.  Ross,  a  distinguished  Presbyterian 
minister,  who  preached  the  divinity  of  slavery,  resided  here.1 
Reverend  Ross  was  arrested  by  General  Rousseau  and  sent 
north  to  prison  for  publicly  praying  in  his  church  at  Hunts 
ville  (while  occupied  by  the  Union  Army)  for  the  success  of  the 
Confederacy,  the  overthrow  of  the  Union,  and  the  defeat  of 
its  armies. 

There  were  some  men,  among  whom  were  Hon.  George  W. 
Lane  (later  appointed  a  United  States  Judge),  who  adhered 
firmly  to  the  Union.  That  part  of  Alabama  north  of  the 
Tennessee  had  opposed  secession. 

Clement  Comer  Clay,  a  lawyer,  who  had  been  a  soldier  in 
the  Creek  Indian  War,  Chief-Justice  of  his  State,  and  had 
served  in  both  branches  of  Congress  and  as  Governor  of  Ala 
bama,  was  arrested  and  tried  at  Huntsville,  when  seventy-three 
years  of  age,  by  a  military  commission  of  which  I  was  presi 
dent.  There  were  several  charges  against  him,  the  most 

1  Ante,  p.  5. 


Personal  Mention  and  Incidents  273 

serious  of  which  was  for  aiding  and  advising  guerrillas  to 
secretly  shoot  down  Union  soldiers,  cut  telegraph  lines,  and 
wreck  trains.  This  charge  he  vehemently  denied  until  a  letter 
in  his  own  handwriting  was  produced,  recently  written  to  a 
guerrilla  chief,  advising  him  and  his  band  to  do  the  things 
mentioned.  He  was  not  severely  dealt  with,  but  was  sent  to 
Camp  Chase,  Ohio,  for  detention.  He  was  later  liberated,  and 
died  in  Huntsville  in  1866.  His  son,  Clement  Claiborne  Clay, 
had  been  a  judge,  and  subsequently  a  United  States  Senator. 
He  withdrew  from  the  Senate  in  February,  1861,  and  was 
formally  expelled  in  March,  1861.  He  became  a  Senator  in 
the  Confederate  Congress  in  1862,  and  during  the  last  two 
years  of  the  war  was  the  secret  agent  of  the  Confederacy  in 
Canada,  where  he  plotted  raids  on  the  Northern  frontier. 

General  O.  M.  Mitchel  held  advanced  notions  on  the  sub 
ject  of  the  treatment  and  disposition  of  slaves  of  masters  in 
arms  against  the  government.  The  slaves  of  such  masters, 
he  thought,  should  be  confiscated.  He  used  some  slaves  as 
spies  to  gain  information  of  the  enemy,  and  to  locate  secreted 
Confederate  supplies,  and  to  them  he  promised  protection,  if 
not  freedom.  Secretary  Stanton  approved  his  action  and 
views  in  this  matter.1 

But  Buell,  his  immediate  commander,  wholly  disapproved 
of  all  employment  or  use  of  slaves  in  any  manner  as  instru 
ments  to  put  down  the  rebellion.  Mitchel,  therefore,  soon 
fell  into  disfavor  with  him.  Buell,  on  learning  that  Mitchel 
had  employed  some  able-bodied  escaped  slaves  to  aid  the 
soldiers  in  constructing  stockades  to  protect  railroad  bridges, 
necessary  to  be  maintained  to  enable  supplies  to  be  brought 
up,  ordered  Mitchel  to  send  an  officer  to  see  that  slaves  thus 
employed  were  forthwith  returned  to  their  masters.  I  was 
accordingly  directed  by  Mitchel  to  take  a  small  guard  and, 
with  a  locomotive  and  car,  go  to  the  bridges  west  of  Huntsville 
and  north  of  the  Tennessee  River,  on  the  line  of  railroad  from 
Decatur  through  Athens  towards  Nashville,  to  execute  this 
order  of  Buell's.  I  executed  it  to  the  letter — only.  While  on 

1  War  Records,  vol.  x.,  Part  II.,  pp.  115,  162-5,  IQ5- 


VOL.  I.— 1 


274  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

this  unpleasant  duty  I  came  to  a  place  where  a  scouting  party, 
commanded  by  a  lieutenant  sent  out  by  Mitchel,  had  two 
citizen-disguised  Confederate  guerrillas,  just  taken  in  the  act 
of  cutting  the  telegraph  wires,  an  offence,  by  a  proclamation 
of  Mitchel,  punishable  by  death.  The  scouting  party  pro 
ceeded  to  hang  them  with  wire  to  telegraph  poles.  I  did  not 
approve  the  summary  punishment,  but  was  powerless  and 
without  authority  over  the  officer ;  and  was  then  engaged  only 
in  returning  slaves  to  their  owners. 

Prior  to  this  order  of  Buell's,  Congress  had  passed  an  act, 
as  an  Article  of  War,  prohibiting  the  employment  of  any  of 
the  United  States  forces  "  for  the  purpose  of  returning  fugi 
tives  from  service  or  labor  who  may  have  escaped,  and  any 
officer  found  guilty,  by  a  court-martial,  of  violating  this  article 
to  be  dismissed  from  the  service."  The  order,  and  my  exe 
cution  of  it,  were  alike  in  violation  of  law,  for  the  issuing  and 
execution  of  which  both  Buell  and  I  could  have  been  dis 
missed  from  the  service.  Just  after  the  capture  of  Fort 
Donelson  Grant  issued  an  order  prohibiting  the  return  of  the 
fugitive  slaves  with  his  army  and  of  all  slaves  at  Fort  Don 
elson  at  the  time  of  its  capture.11 

Both  Stevenson  and  Decatur,  to  the  east  and  west  of  Hunts- 
ville,  were,  by  the  use  of  captured  locomotives  and  cars,  seized 
by  Mitchel  on  the  I2th  of  April,  and  his  command  was  soon 
so  extended  as  to  hold  the  one  hundred  miles  of  railroad  be 
tween  Stevenson  and  Tuscumbia.  The  last  of  the  same 
month,  however,  the  troops  were  withdrawn  from  Tuscumbia 
and  south  of  the  Tennessee.  The  3d  and  loth  Ohio  being  in 
occupancy  of  Decatur,  evacuated  it  under  orders,  and,  on  the 
night  of  April  2/th,  burned  the  railroad  bridge  (one  half  mile 
in  length)  over  the  Tennessee  River. 

An  expedition  started  the  same  day  for  Bridgeport,  where 
the  railroad  again  crosses  the  Tennessee,  and  where  General 
Danville  Leadbetter  had  command  of  a  small  force  on  the  west 
side  of  the  river,  somewhat  intrenched.  The  expedition 

1  Quoted  in  Lincoln's  22d  of  September,  1862,  proclamation. 

2  McPherson,  History  of  Reconstruction,  p.  293. 


Affair  at  Bridgeport,  Alabama  275 

consisted  of  two  companies  of  cavalry,  two  pieces  of  artillery, 
and  six  regiments  of  infantry,  Mitchel  commanding.  Owing  to 
the  destruction  by  the  Confederates  of  a  bridge  over  Widow's 
Creek,  it  was  impossible  to  transport  by  rail  the  artillery  with 
caissons  and  horses  nearer  than  four  miles  of  Bridgeport.  By 
the  use  of  cotton  bales  the  two  guns  were  floated  over  the 
deep  stream,  and  the  artillery  horses  and  caissons  with  extra 
ammunition  were  left  behind.  The  guns  were  dragged  by  two 
companies  of  the  3d  Ohio,  and  the  whole  expedition  pushed 
on  to  a  ridge  within  about  five  hundred  yards  of  Leadbetter's 
redoubts  near  the  north  end  of  the  bridge.  The  enemy  was 
surprised  or  demoralized,  and  Leadbetter  did  not  decide  either 
to  retreat  or  fight  until  a  shot  or  two  from  our  cannon  emptied 
his  redoubts  and  intrenched  position  near  the  end  of  the  bridge. 

Precipitately  his  guns  were  loaded  on  a  platform-car,  and  a 
hasty  retreat  was  made  across  the  Tennessee  by  the  railroad 
bridge;  but  before  all  the  Confederate  troops  had  succeeded  in 
crossing  Leadbetter  caused  to  be  exploded  two  hundred 
pounds  of  powder,  with  a  view  of  blowing  up  the  east  span  of 
the  bridge.  The  explosion  did  not  do  the  work,  hence  the  draw 
bridge  at  the  east  end  was  fired,  to  complete  its  destruction.1 
But  few  captures  were  made.  Leadbetter  also  abandoned  his 
camp  east  of  the  river,  and  was  forced  to  abandon  two  guns 
placed  in  position  on  the  east  bank.  One  of  the  Andrews 
raiders  of  the  33d  Ohio,  who,  to  save  himself  from  capture 
and  punishment,  had  joined  Captain  Kain's  battery,  and  was 
acting  as  artillery  sergeant  with  the  two  guns  captured,  hid 
under  the  river  bank  and  signalled  his  desire  to  be  allowed  to 
surrender.  He  was  permitted  to  cross  over  to  us,  and,  his  old 
regiment  being  present,  he  at  once  rejoined  it. 

Mitchel  moved  his  command  on  Bridgeport  with  great 
rapidity  and  skill,  but  he  showed  a  nervous  temper,  which 
gave  the  impression  that  in  a  great  battle  he  would  become 
too  much  excited  for  a  commanding  officer. 

Just  after  Leadbetter's  retreat  a  body  of  his  cavalry  appeared 
below  Bridgeport  in  an  open  field,  not  knowing  the  place  had 

1  War  Records,  vol.  x.,  Part  I.,  p.  657. 


276  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

been  taken,  and  would  have  been  captured  had  Mitchel  not 
ordered  them  fired  on  before  they  came  near  enough  to  be  cut 
off. 

I  was  sent  on  the  morning  of  the  3Oth,  in  command  of  a 
detachment,  across  the  Tennessee  to  reconnoitre  towards 
Chattanooga.  We  improvised  rafts  from  logs  and  timber  to 
carry  the  men,  and  a  few  horses  for  mounted  officers  were 
forced  into  the  stream,  and  by  holding  their  heads  to  the  rafts 
compelled  to  swim  the  east  channel  of  the  Tennessee.  We 
secured  the  two  guns  mentioned,  some  muskets  and  supplies 
at  the  enemy's  camps,  and  found  evidence  of  a  hasty  flight  of 
the  Confederates.  By  a  detour  we  came  into  a  valley  flanked 
to  the  east  by  Raccoon  Mountain,  and  we  visited  a  large  salt 
petre  works  at  Nick-a-Jack  Cave.  These  works  we  destroyed 
by  breaking  the  large  iron  kettles  and  by  burning  all  combus 
tible  structures.  A  portion  of  the  detachment  was  sent  under 
cover  of  the  thick  woods  to  the  railroad  east  of  Shellmound, 
a  station  near  the  river,  where  we  expected  to  cut  off  a  train 
of  cars  engaged  in  loading,  for  removal,  supplies  of  provisions. 
The  engineer,  a  few  moments  before  the  party  reached  the 
railroad,  had  run  his  engine  to  a  water-station  located  east  of 
the  point  of  our  intersection,  and  it  thus  escaped  capture. 
We,  however,  captured  one  captain  and  about  a  dozen  men ; 
also  the  cars  of  the  train  and  considerable  supplies,  all  of  which 
we  were  obliged  to  destroy,  save  some  choice,  much-needed 
hams.  These  we  loaded  on  a  flat  car,  which  we  pushed  about 
ten  miles  to  the  east  abutment  of  the  broken  bridge.  This 
raid  caused  great  consternation  at  Chattanooga  for  several 
days.  The  detachment  was  reported  as  5000  strong  at  Shell- 
mound,  and  Leadbetter  ordered  all  "  bridges  on  the  railroad 
and  country  roads  "  burned,  and  a  retreat  to  Lookout  Moun 
tain.1  It  would  have  been  easy  then  to  have  taken  Chatta 
nooga.  A  year  and  a  half  later  it  cost  many  lives  and  became 
about  the  only  Union  trophy  of  the  battle  of  Chickamauga. 

I  learned  on  this  raid,  from  prisoners,  that  Farragut  and 
Butler  had,  on  April  29,  1862,  obtained  possession  of  New 

1  Leadbetter's  report,   War  Records,  vol.  x..  Part  I.,  p.  658. 


Sacking  of  Athens — Colonel  Turchin      277 

Orleans.  This  was  the  first  information  of  their  success  re 
ceived  at  the  North.1 

My  expedition  was  the  first  armed  one  of  the  war  upon  the 
mainland  of  Georgia. 

On  my  return  to  the  west  side  of  the  river  I  found  my  regi 
ment,  with  others,  under  orders  to  march  at  9  o'clock  at  night 
for  Stevenson,  destination  Athens,  Alabama.  The  enemy, 
under  Colonel  J.  S.  Scott,  attacked  (May  1st)  and  drove  out 
of  Athens  the  i8th  Ohio,  under  Colonel  T.  R.  Stanley.  The 
affair  was  not  a  creditable  one  to  either  side.  The  troops 
under  Scott  were  said  to  have  been  harbored  in  houses  from 
which  they  fired  on  Stanley's  men  as  the  latter  fled  through 
the  streets,  and  it  was  claimed  citizens  aided  in  shooting  down 
Union  soldiers,  though  this  was  never  shown  to  be  true. 
Scott,  in  his  report  to  Beauregard,  dated  the  day  of  the  fight, 
boasted  that  the  "  boys  took  few  prisoners,  their  shots  proving 
singularly  fatal."  ' 

The  affair  was  in  itself  of  little  consequence,  as  Colonel  Scott 
was  driven  out  of  Athens  the  succeeding  night,  and  the  next 
day  across  the  Tennessee,  he  only  having  captured  Stanley's 
baggage,  four  wagons,  and  twenty  men,  having  suffered  in 
killed  and  wounded  a  greater  loss  than  he  had  inflicted. 

Out  of  this  incident  arose  one  of  the  most  exceptional  occur 
rences  of  the  whole  war. 

Colonel  John  Basil-'Turchin,  of  the  iQth  Illinois,  in  com 
mand  of  a  brigade  in  Mitchel's  division,  reached  Athens,  May 
2d,  and,  it  was  said,  in  retaliation  for  the  alleged  bad  conduct 
of  its  citizens  the  day  preceding,  he  retired  to  his  tent  and 
gave  the  place  up  for  two  hours  to  be  sacked  by  his  command. 
It  was  asserted  that  private  houses  were  invaded  during  this 
time,  money  and  valuables  seized  and  carried  off,  and  revolt 
ing  outrages  committed.  Turchin  was  a  Russian,3  a  soldier  of 
experience,  and  a  military  man,  educated  in  the  best  schools 
of  Europe,  He  had  served  on  the  general  staff  of  the  Czar 

1  War  Records,  vol.  x.,  Part  I.,  p.  878. 

2  Russian  name — Ivan  Vasilevitch  Turchininoff.     Turchin,   Battle  of  Chicka- 

mauga,  pp.  5,  6. 


278  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

of  Russia  and  in  the  Imperial  Guard,  rising  to  the  rank  of 
Colonel,  and  he  had  served  his  Czar  also  in  the  Hungarian 
War,  1848-49,  and  in  the  Crimean  War  of  1854-56. 

It  is  more  than  possible  that  he  had  imbibed  notions  as  to 
the  manner  and  believed  in  methods  of  treating  the  enemy's 
property,  including  their  slaves,  and  of  dealing  with  captured 
towns  and  cities  and  their  inhabitants,  not  in  harmony  with 
modern  and  more  humane  and  civilized  rules  of  war. 

He  did  not  believe  war  could  be  successfully  waged  by  an 
invading  army  with  its  officers  and  soldiers  acting  as  mis 
sionaries  of  mercy  for  and  protectors  and  preservers  of  the 
property  of  hostile  inhabitants.  Later,  and  after  General 
McCausland  burned  Chambersburg,  Penna.,  less  criticism  fell 
on  Turchin  for  his  behavior  at  Athens. 

His  conduct  and  that  of  his  command  were  doubtless  ex 
aggerated  in  many  particulars,  but  enough  was  true  to  excite 
much  comment  and  fierce  denunciation  and  condemnation. 
The  affair  was  especially  unfortunate  as  to  place,  Athens  being 
justly  celebrated  for  the  number  of  inhabitants  who  honestly 
adhered  to  the  Union  cause. 

General  Mitchel  repaired  to  Athens  on  hearing  it  had  been 
sacked,  addressed  the  citizens,  induced  them  to  organize  a 
committee  to  hear  and  report  on  all  complaints;  then  ordered 
the  brigade  commander  to  cause  every  soldier  under  him  to  be 
searched,  and  every  officer  to  state  in  writing,  upon  honor, 
that  he  had  no  pillaged  property.  The  committee  subse 
quently  reported,  but  no  charge  was  made  against  any  officer 
or  soldiers  by  name.  The  bills  of  forty-five  citizens,  however, 
were  presented  by  it,  aggregating  $54,689.80,  for  alleged  dep 
redations.  The  search  was  made  without  finding  an  article 
and  the  reports  of  officers  showed  that  they  had  no  stolen 
property. 

Strict  orders  against  pillaging  and  plundering  were  issued 
and  .hereafter  enforced  in  Mitchel's  division.  The  outrages 
upon  women,  if  any  occurred,  were  greatly  magnified.1 

Buell  caused  Turchin  to  be  placed  in  arrest,  and  he  was  later 

1  War  Records,  vol.  x.,  Part  II.,  pp.  204,  212,  290,  294-5. 


Sacking  of  Athens — Colonel  Turchin      279 

tried,  convicted,  and  sentenced  to  be  dismissed  the  service  of 
the  United  States,  the  court  having  found  him  guilty  of 
4<  neglect  of  duty,  to  the  prejudice  of  good  order  and  military 
discipline,"  and  of  "  disobedience  of  orders,"  and  of  certain 
specifications  to  the  charges,  among  others  one  embodying  the 
allegation  that  he  did  "on  or  about  the  2d  of  May,  1862,  march 
his  brigade  into  the  town  of  Athens,  State  of  Alabama,  and  hav 
ing  had  the  arms  of  the  regiments  stacked  in  the  streets,  did 
allow  his  command  to  disperse,  and  in  his  presence,  or  with  his 
knowledge  and  that  of  his  officers,  to  plunder  and  pillage  the 
inhabitants  of  said  town  and  of  the  country  adjacent  thereto, 
without  taking  adequate  steps  to  restrain  them."  He  pleaded 
guilty  to  one  specification  only,  namely,  that  of  permitting 
his  wife  to  be  with  him  in  Athens,  and  to  accompany  him 
while  serving  with  the  troops  in  the  field.  This  court-martial 
was  ordered  by  Buell,  July  5,  1862,  and  it  met  first  at  Athens 
and  then  at  Huntsville,  Alabama,  July  20th.1  General  James 
A.  Garfield  was  its  President,  and  Colonels  John  Beatty,  Jacob 
Ammen,  Curran  Pope,  J.  G.  Jones,  Marc  Mundy,  and  T.  D. 
Sedgwick  were  the  other  members. 

During  the  sessions  of  the  court,  General  Garfield  and 
Colonel  Ammen  were  the  guests  of  Colonel  Beatty  and  myself 
at  our  camp  near  Huntsville.  Though  I  had  met  Garfield,  I 
had  no  previous  acquaintance  with  either  of  them.  They  were 
even  then  remarkable  men — both  accomplished  and  highly 
educated,  Ammen  having  previously  had  a  military  education. 
We  were  enabled  to  get  intimately  acquainted  with  them  at 
our  meals  and  during  the  long  evenings  spent  in  discussing 
the  war  and  all  manner  of  subjects.  Both  were  fine  talkers 
and  enjoyed  controversial  conversation.  Ammen,  though  not 
alone  from  vanity,  was  disposed  to  occupy  the  most  of  the 
time,  and  sometimes  he  would  occupy  an  entire  evening  telling 
stories,  narrating  an  event,  or  maintaining  his  own  side  of  a 
controversy.  He  was  the  oldest  of  the  party,  and  always 
interesting,  so  he  was  tolerated  in  this — generally.  He  was 
superstitious,  and  believed  in  the  supernatural  to  a  certain 

1  War  Records,  vol.  xvi.,  Part  II.,  pp.  99,  273. 


280  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

extent,  denying  that  such  belief  was  a  weakness,  else  "  Na 
poleon  and  Sir  Walter  Scott  were  the  weakest  of  men."  Gen 
eral  Beatty  relates  an  incident  of  an  evening's  talk  (July  24th) 
at  our  camp  thus: 

"We  ate  supper,  and  immediately  adjourned  to  the  adjoining 
tent.  Before  Garfield  was  fairly  seated  on  his  camp  stool,  he  be 
gan  to  talk  with  the  easy  and  deliberate  manner  of  a  man  who  had 
much  to  say.  He  dwelt  eloquently  on  the  minutest  details  of  his 
early  life,  as  if  they  were  matters  of  the  utmost  importance.  Keifer 
was  not  only  an  attentive  listener,  but  seemed  wonderfully  inter 
ested.  Uncle  Jacob  undertook  to  thrust  in  a  word  here  and  there, 
but  Garfield  was  too  much  absorbed  to  notice  him,  and  so  pushed 
on  steadily,  warming  up  as  he  proceeded.  Unfortunately  for  his 
scheme,  however,  before  he  had  gone  far  he  made  a  touching  refer 
ence  to  his  mother,  when  Uncle  Jacob,  gesticulating  energetically, 
and  with  his  forefinger  levelled  at  the  speaker,  cried  :  '  Just  a  word 
— just  one  word  right  there,'  and  so  persisted  until  Garfield  was  com 
pelled  either  to  yield  or  be  absolutely  discourteous.  The  General, 
therefore,  got  in  his  word  ;  nay,  he  held  the  floor  for  the  remainder 
of  the  evening.  The  conspirators  made  brave  efforts  to  put  him 
down  and  cut  him  off,  but  they  were  unsuccessful.  At  midnight, 
when  Keifer  and  I  left,  he  was  still  talking  ;  and  after  we  had  got 
into  bed,  he,  with  his  suspenders  dangling  about  his  legs,  thrust  his 
head  into  our  tent-door,  and  favored  us  with  the  few  observations 
we  had  lost  by  reason  of  our  hasty  departure.  Keifer  turned  his 
face  to  the  wall  and  groaned.  Poor  man,  he  had  been  hoisted  by 
his  own  petard.  I  think  Uncle  Jacob  suspected  that  the  young 
men  had  set  up  a  job  on  him." ' 

The  court  having  concluded  the  case,  Buell,  August  6,  1862, 
issued  an  order  approving  its  proceedings  and  sentence  of 
dismissal  from  the  service,  and  declaring  that  Colonel  Turchin 
ceased  to  be  in  the  service  of  the  United  States." 

Although  the  charges  against  him  and  his  trial  were  noto 
rious,  and  well  known  at  the  War  Department  and  to  the 
country,  President  Lincoln,  the  day  preceding  Buell's  order 
of  dismissal,  appointed  Colonel  Turchin  a  Brigadier-General 

1  Citizen  Soldier,  p.  159.  9  War  Records,  vol.  xvi.,  p.  277. 


Sacking  of  Athens — Colonel  Turchin      281 

of  Volunteers,  and  the  Senate  promptly  confirmed  the  appoint 
ment,  and  thus  he  came  out  of  his  trial  and  condemnation 
with  increased  rank.  He  accepted  the  promotion,  served  in 
the  field  afterwards,  was  distinguished  in  many  battles,  and 
left  the  army  October  4,  1864. 

Turchin  at  the  time  he  entered  the  Union  Army  was,  and 
still  is,  a  resident  of  Illinois. 

There  were  many  excellent  men  of  foreign  birth  and  resi 
dence  who  found  places  in  the  Union  Army  and  filled  them 
with  credit.1 

1  My  last  letter  from  Gen.  Robert  C.  Schenck  speaks  of  meeting,  while  Minister 
to  England,  a  former  Ohio  soldier.      I  give  his  letter,  omitting  unimportant  parts. 
"  MARSHALL  HOUSE,  YORK  HARBOR,  MAINE,  July  10,  1889. 

"  MY  DEAR  GENERAL  KEIFER, — Your  letter  came  to  me  just  as  I  was  leaving 
Washington.  ...  I  keep  fairly  well  and  vigorous  for  an  old  fellow  so  near 
to  the  octogenarian  line.  Accept  my  thanks  for  your  kind  remembrance  and  good 
wishes.  You  want  to  know  about  Colonel  John  DeCourcey,  who  commanded  the 
[i6th]  regiment  of  Ohio  Infantry  for  some  time  during  our  late  war.  I  have  not 
much  to  tell  you  of  him,  except  that  I  made  his  acquaintance  afterwards  as  a  British 
nobleman.  He  was  appointed  a  Union  officer,  I  believe,  by  Governor  Dennison, 
and  had  had,  as  I  understand,  some  previous  military  experience  and  training. 

"  One  night,  in  a  party  at  the  house  of  a  friend  in  London,  about  1872,  I  was 
told  that  Lord  Kinsale  desired  especially  to  be  presented  to  me.  I  said  of  course 
it  would  be  agreeable.  On  being  introduced  he  explained  that,  besides  a  general 
desire  to  pay  his  respects  to  the  American  Minister,  he  took  an  interest  in  me  as 
being  from  Ohio.  I  was  a  little  surprised  to  find  an  English  gentleman  having 
any  particular  knowledge  about  Ohio.  He  went  on  to  tell  me  he  had  not  been  in 
London  for  some  time,  and  had  been  ill,  or  he  would  have  called  on  me  before 
that  time,  for  that  he  had  served  as  commander  of  an  Ohio  regiment  during  our 
late  war.  This  surprised  me,  but  he  explained  that  he  was  not  then  Lord  Kin- 
sale,  else  the  fact  might  have  attracted  some  attention,  but  only  John  DeCourcey, 
having  succeeded  rather  unexpectedly  to  the  title.  I  think  he  said  on  the  death  of 
a  cousin,  and  perhaps  the  end  of  one  or  two  other  lives  intervening.  He  was  him 
self  then  an  invalid,  apparently,  and  has  since  died.  I  found  him  an  agreeable 
gentleman. 

"  The  Barony  of  Kinsale  is  an  old  title.  I  believe  this  Lord  Kinsale  was  the 
3 rst  or  32d  Baron.  His  ancestor,  Earl  of  Ulster,  for  defending  King  John,  in 
single  combat,  with  a  champion  provided  by  Philip  Augustus  of  France,  was 
granted  the  privilege  for  himself  and  heirs  forever  to  go  with  covered  head  in  the 
presence  of  Royalty.  This,  my  dear  General,  must  be  about  all  that  I  told  you  of 
John  DeCourcey,  or  could  remember  when  I  met  you  on  the  occasion  you  men 
tion,  at  Springfield.  Hoping  you  are  in  good  heart  and  health,  I  am 

41  Very  sincerely  yours,  ROBT.  C.  SCHENCK." 


282  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

At  Paint  Rock,  on  the  railroad  east  of  Huntsville,  the  train 
on  which  the  3d  Ohio  was  being  transported  from  Stevenson 
(May  2d)  was  fired  upon  from  ambush  by  guerrillas,  and  six  or 
eight  men  more  or  less  seriously  wounded. 

Colonel  Beatty  stopped  the  train,  and  after  giving  the  citi 
zens  notice  that  all  such  acts  of  bushwhacking  would  bring  on 
them  certain  destruction  of  property,  as  it  was  known  that 
professed  peaceful  citizens  were  often  themselves  the  guilty 
parties  or  harbored  the  guilty  ones,  himself  fired  the  town  as 
an  earnest  of  what  a  repetition  of  such  deeds  would  bring. 

Many  fruitless  small  expeditions  were  undertaken  to  drive 
out  the  constant  invasions  made  by  Wheeler's,  Morgan's, 
Adams',  and  Scott's  cavalry  north  of  the  Tennessee  and  upon 
our  lines  of  communication. 

On  May  i8th,  having  become  restless  in  camp,  I  volunteered 
as  special  aide  to  Colonel  Wm.  H.  Lytle  on  an  expedition  to 
Winchester,  Tennessee.  We  passed  through  a  region  thickly 
infested  with  the  most  daring  bands  of  guerrillas,  and  at  Win 
chester  had  an  encounter  with  some  of  Adams'  regular  cav 
alry,  who,  after  making  a  rash  charge  into  the  town  while  we 
occupied  it  and  losing  a  few  men,  retreated  eastward  to  the 
mountains. 

On  May  I3th  General  James  S.  Negley  led  a  force  from 
Pulaski  against  Adams'  cavalry  at  Rogersville,  north  of  the 
Tennessee  opposite  the  Muscle  Shoals,  and  with  slight  loss 
drove  it  across  the  river.  Later  there  was  a  more  determined 
effort  by  the  Confederates  to  occupy,  with  considerable  bodies 
of  cavalry  and  light  artillery,  the  country  north  of  the  Ten 
nessee  below  Chattanooga,  but  June  4th,  an  expedition  under 
Negley,  composed  of  troops  selected  from  Mitchel's  command, 
surprised  Adams  with  his  principal  force  twelve  miles  north 
west  of  Jasper,  and  routed  him,  killing  about  twenty  of  his 
men  and  wounding  and  capturing  about  one  hundred  more; 
also  capturing  arms,  ammunition,  commissary  wagons,  and 
supplies.1  Negley  pushed  his  command  over  the  mountains 
up  the  Tennessee,  threatening  to  cross  to  the  south  side  at 

1  War  Records,  vol.  x.,  Part  I.,  pp.  904,  919-920. 


Personal  Matters  283 

Shellmound,  and  at  other  points,  and  finally  took  position 
opposite  Chattanooga. 

This  expedition  caused  much  consternation  among  the 
rebels,  though  little  was  actually  accomplished.  The  attack 
made  on  Chattanooga,  June  7th  and  8th,  failed,  and  Negley's 
command  returned.1  Colonel  Joshua  W.  Sill,  33d  Ohio,  after 
wards  Brigadier-General,  and  killed  at  the  battle  of  Stone's 
River,  commanded  a  brigade  under  Mitchel  and  in  the  Chat 
tanooga  expedition.  He  was  an  accomplished,  educated 
officer,  modest  almost  to  a  fault,  yet  brave  and  capable  of 
great  deeds.  His  body  is  buried  at  Chillicothe,  Ohio. 

Mitchel's  position  in  Northern  Alabama  was  at  all  times 
precarious;  he  covered  too  much  country;  lacked  concentra 
tion,  and  was  constantly  in  danger  of  being  assailed  in  detail; 
besides,  his  relations  to  Euell,  his  immediate  commander,  were 
not  cordial.  He  complained  frequently  directly  to  the  Secre 
tary  of  War  for  want  of  support.  Shortly  after  Buell's  arrival 
from  Corinth,  the  last  of  June,  Mitchel  tendered  his  resigna 
tion  and  asked  to  be  granted  immediate  leave  of  absence,  but 
the  next  day  (July  2d)  he  was,  by  the  Secretary  ot  War, 
ordered  to  repair  to  Washington,3  and  General  Lovell  H. 
Rousseau,  a  Kentuckian,  who  also  believed  in  a  vigorous  pros 
ecution  of  the  war,  succeeded  him.  General  Mitchel  on 
reaching  Washington  was  selected  by  President  Lincoln  for 
the  command  of  an  expedition  on  the  Mississippi,  but  Halleck 
opposed  his  selection  and  failed  to  give  the  necessary  orders 
for  the  contemplated  movement,  consequently  Mitchel  re 
mained  inactive  until  September,  when  he  was  assigned  to  the 
command  of  the  Department  of  the  South,  headquarters  Hilton 
Head.  He  was  stricken  with  yellow  fever  and  died  at  Beau 
fort,  South  Carolina,  October  30,  1862.  He  is  buried  at 
Greenwood  Cemetery,  Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

1  War  Records,  vol.  x.,  Part  I.,  pp.  904,  919-920. 

*  Battles  and  Leaders,  etc.,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  706-7;    War  Records,  vol.  xvi.,  Part 
II.,  p.  92. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

CONFEDERATE  INVASION  OF  KENTUCKY  (1862)— CINCINNATI 
THREATENED,  AND  "  SQUIRREL  HUNTERS  "  CALLED 
OUT  —  BATTLES  OF  IUKA,  CORINTH,  AND  HATCHIE 
BRIDGE — MOVEMENTS  OF  CONFEDERATE  ARMIES  OF 
BRAGG  AND  KIRBY  SMITH— RETIREMENT  OF  BUELL'S 
ARMY  TO  LOUISVILLE — BATTLE  OF  PERRYVILLE,  WITH 
PERSONAL  AND  OTHER  INCIDENTS 

AS  we  have  seen,  Halleck's  great  army  at  Corinth  was  dis 
persed,  the   Army  of  the    Ohio    going   eastward.     It 
spent  the  month  of  June,   1862,  in  rebuilding  bridges, 
including  the  great  bridge  across  the  Tennessee  at  Decatur, 
but  recently  burned  under  his  direction,  and  soon  again  to  be 
abandoned  to  the  Confederates. 

The  Confederate  authorities  projected  an  invasion  on  two 
lines  and  with  two  armies, — one  under  General  E.  Kirby 
Smith  and  the  other  under  General  Braxton  Bragg, — the  Ohio 
River  and  the  cities  of  Louisville  and  Cincinnati  being  the  ob 
jective  points;  the  design  being,  also,  to  recruit  the  Con 
federate  armies  in  Kentucky,  obtain  supplies,  and  force  the 
evacuation  by  the  Union  Army  of  Alabama  and  Tennessee, 
and  especially  of  Nashville.  Early  in  August,  1862,  these 
two  Confederate  armies  were  assembled  at  Knoxville  and 
Chattanooga  and  along  the  Upper  Tennessee,  Kirby  Smith's 
main  force  at  the  former  and  Bragg's  at  the  latter  place.  The 
objectives  of  these  armies  were  soon  known,  and  the  Army  of 
the  Ohio  was  therefore  ordered  to  concentrate  from  its  scat 
tered  situation  at  Dechard  and  Winchester,  Tennessee. 

284 


Confederates  Invade  Kentucky  285 

General  Robert  L.  McCook,  late  Colonel  of  the  Qth  Ohio, 
commanding  a  brigade  under  General  George  H.  Thomas, 
while  riding  in  an  ambulance  at  the  head  of  his  command,  ill 
and  helpless,  was  shot  and  mortally  wounded,  August  5th, 
about  three  miles  eastward  of  New  Market,  Alabama,  by  a 
body  of  ambushed  men,  said  to  have  been  guerrillas  in  citizens' 
dress.  He  died  at  12  M.,  August  6th.  His  command,  in  re 
taliation,  laid  the  country  waste  around  about  the  scene  of  his 
death.1  McCook  had  fought  in  Western  Virginia;  at  Mill 
Springs  (where  he  was  wounded),  at  Shiloh,  and  elsewhere. 
He  was  one  of  the  ten  sons  of  Major  Daniel  McCook,  who 
was  killed  (July  21,  1863),  at  sixty-five  years  of  age,  near 
Buffington's  Island,  during  the  Morgan  raid  in  Ohio,  while 
leading  a  party  to  cut  off  Morgan's  escape  across  the  Ohio 
River.  Two  brothers  of  his  were  killed  in  battle — Charles 
M.,  at  Bull  Run,  July  21,  1861,  and  Daniel  at  Kenesaw,  July 
21,  1864.  Alexander  McDowell  McCook  commanded  a  corps, 
and  all  the  brothers  had  honorable  war  records.  Dr.  John 
McCook,  brother  of  the  senior  Daniel  McCook,  likewise  served 
and  died  in  the  war.  He  had  five  sons,  three  of  whom  served 
with  distinction  in  the  volunteer  army  and  two  in  the  navy. 
I  knew  John's  son,  General  Anson  George  McCook,  first  in 
Mitchel's  division  as  Major  and  Lieutenant-Colonel  of  the  2d 
Ohio,  then  in  the  Forty-fifth,  Forty-sixth,  and  Forty-seventh 
Congresses,  and  later  as  Secretary  of  the  United  States  Senate. 

The  killing  of  General  R.  L.  McCook,  under  the  circum 
stances,  was  regarded  as  murder,  and  excited  deep  indignation 
both  in  and  out  of  the  army.  Even  Buell  issued  orders  to 
arrest  every  able-bodied  man  of  suspicious  character  within  a 
radius  of  ten  miles  of  the  place  where  McCook  was  shot,  to 
take  all  horses  fit  for  service  within  that  circuit,  and  to  pursue 
and  destroy  bushwhackers.2  With  the  arrest  of  a  few  men 
and  the  taking  of  some  horses,  however,  the  incident  closed 
so  far  as  official  action  was  concerned. 

Memphis  was  taken,  on  June  6,  1862,  by  Flag  Officer  C.  H. 

1  War  Records,  vol.  xvi.,  Part  I.,  pp.  838-841. 
*  Ibid.,  Part  II.,  p.  290. 


286  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

Davis,  having  with  him  a  Ram  Fleet  under  Colonel  Charles 
Ellet,  Jr.,  and  an  Indiana  brigade  under  Colonel  G.  N. 
Fitch.1 

The  plan  of  the  Confederate  invasion,  as  already  stated,  was 
to  operate  on  two  lines :  Kirby  Smith  from  Knoxville  was  first 
to  move  on  and  take  Cumberland  Gap,  then  held  by  General 
George  W.  Morgan.  Bragg  was  at  Tupelo,  Mississippi,  July 
i8th,  but,  fired  with  the  idea  that  on  Kentucky  being  invaded 
her  people  would  flock  to  arms  under  the  Confederate  stan 
dard,  he  commenced  transferring  his  army  to  the  new  field  of 
operations  and  removed  his  headquarters,  July  29th,  to  Chat 
tanooga. 

Kirby  Smith  took  the  field  August  I3th,  moving  on  Cum 
berland  Gap,  but,  finding  it  impregnable  by  direct  attack,  he 
left  General  Stevenson  with  a  division  to  threaten  it  and 
advanced  on  Lexington.  John  Morgan  with  a  considerable 
body  of  cavalry  preceded  Smith  into  Middle  Kentucky,  and 
his  incursion  was  taken  as  a  forerunner  of  the  greater  one  to 
follow.  Alarm  over  the  audacious  movement  was  not  limited 
to  Kentucky ;  it  spread  to  Ohio,  and  there  were  fears  for  the 
safety  of  Cincinnati. 

General  Horatio  G.  Wright  was  assigned  to  a  new  Depart 
ment  of  the  Ohio,  composed  of  the  States  of  Ohio,  Michigan, 
Indiana,  Illinois,  Wisconsin,  and  Kentucky  east  of  the  Ten 
nessee  River,  including  Cumberland  Gap,  and  he  assumed 
command  of  it  August  23d,  headquarters  at  Cincinnati.2  On 
the  i6th,  Buell  had  ordered  General  Wm.  Nelson  from  the 
vicinity  of  Murfreesboro,  with  some  artillery  and  infantry,  to 
Kentucky,  to  there  organize  troops  to  keep  open  communica 
tions  and  operate  against  John  Morgan.3  Wright,  on  the  23d, 
ordered  Nelson  to  Lexington  to  assume  command  of  the 
troops  in  that  vicinity  and  to  relieve  General  Lew  Wallace. 
Nelson,  with  insufficient,  and  mainly  new,  undrilled,  and  un 
disciplined  troops,  moved  to  Richmond,  Ky.,  where  (August 

1  War  Records,  vol.  x.,  Part.  I.,  p.  910.       *  Ibid,,  vol.  xvi.,  Part  II..  p.  404. 
3  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol.  iii.,  p.  39,  and  see  War  Records,  vol.  xvi.,  Part  II., 
PP-  394,  395- 


Confederates  Invade  Kentucky  287 

3Oth)  he  was  assailed  by  Kirby  Smith's  army  and  his  forces 
disastrously  routed  with  much  loss,  principally  in  captured. 
He  was  himself  wounded  in  the  leg  by  a  musket  ball.  There 
were  few  organized  Union  troops  now  between  Smith's  army 
and  the  Ohio  River,  and  such  organizations  as  could  be  as 
sembled  were  new  and  unable  to  cope  with  the  Confederate 
veterans.  The  news  of  the  defeat  at  Richmond  reached  Cin 
cinnati  the  same  evening,  and  it  was  at  once  assumed  that 
Lexington  and  Frankfort  would  soon  be  in  the  enemy's  hands, 
and  Kirby  Smith's  army  would  forthwith  march  on  Covington, 
Newport,  and  Cincinnati.  The  assumption  proved  correct,  as 
the  defeated  troops  retreated  through  Frankfort  and  Lexing 
ton. 

The  Mayor  (George  Hatch)  and  City  Council  of  Cincinnati 
acted  with  courage  and  energy  to  meet  the  impending  emer 
gency,  and  the  loyal  people  earnestly  responded  to  all  require 
ments  and  submitted  to  the  military  authorities,  either  to  take 
up  arms  or  to  work  on  intrenchments.  Lew  Wallace,  assigned 
by  Wright  to  the  immediate  command  of  the  three  cities, 
proclaimed  martial  law  to  be  executed  (until  relieved  by  the 
military)  by  the  police ;  and  business  generally  was  suspended. 

The  Mayor,  with  Wallace's  sanction,  permitted  the  banks 
to  remain  open  from  i  to  2  P.M.  ;  bakers  to  pursue  their  occu 
pation  ;  physicians  to  attend  their  patients ;  employees  of  news 
papers  to  pursue  their  business;  funerals  to  be  permitted,  but 
mourners  only  to  leave  the  city;  all  druggists  were  allowed 
to  do  business,  but  all  drinking  saloons,  eating-houses,  and 
places  of  amusement  were  to  be  kept  closed.  Governor  David 
Tod,  September  1st,  authorized  the  reception  of  armed  citi 
zens  from  throughout  the  State,  who  were  denominated 
"  Squirrel  Hunters '. "  The  patriotism  of  the  people  of  Ohio 
and  Indiana  was  heroically  shown,  and  their  rushing  in  large 
numbers  to  the  defence  of  Cincinnati  and  other  threatened 
cities  may  have  had  its  influence,  and  was,  at  least,  highly 
commendable;  yet,  if  a  real  attack  had  been  made  on  these 
cities,  it  is  hardly  likely  the  "  Squirrel  Hunters  "  would  have 
proved  efficient  as  soldiers.  Kirby  Smith  entered  Lexington, 


288  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

Ky.,  September  1st,  and  two  days  later  he  dispatched  General 
Heath  with  about  six  thousand  men  to  threaten  Cincinnati. 
Heath  was  joined  the  next  day  by  Morgan  and  his  raiders. 
By  the  roth  these  forces  were  near  Covington  and  threatened 
a  serious  attack.  There  were  some  artillery  shots  fired  and 
some  light  skirmishing,  but  the  next  day  it  was  ascertained 
the  Confederates  had  commenced  a  retreat,  and  in  a  few  days 
the  "  Squirrel  Hunters"  returned  to  their  homes  amid  the 
plaudits  of  a  loyal  people,  and  business  was  resumed  in  the 
Queen  City.  A  single  act  of  disorder  is  reported  in  Cincinnati 
on  the  part  of  some  citizens  who  began  tearing  up  a  street 
railroad  because  it  was  believed  to  be  invidious  to  allow  it  to 
do  business  "  when  lager-beer  saloons  could  not." 

The  Legislature  of  Ohio  authorized  the  presentation  by 
the  Governor  of  a  lithographic  discharge  to  each  ''Squirrel 
Hunter. 

Before  narrating  the  movements  of  Bragg's  army  from  the 
Tennessee  to  the  vicinity  of  Louisville,  and  of  Buell's  army  in 
pursuit  on  Bragg's  flank  and  rear,  an  attempt  by  another  Con 
federate  column  to  co-operate  with  Bragg  in  carrying  out  his 
general  plan  of  invading  Kentucky  should  be  mentioned. 

General  Sterling  Price,  hitherto  operating  in  Arkansas  and 
Missouri,  immediately  after  Shiloh,  had  been  transferred  with 
his  army  to  Corinth  to  reinforce  Beauregard,  and  when  Bragg, 
who  succeeded  Beauregard,  decided  upon  his  plan  of  invasion, 
and  had  concentrated  the  bulk  of  his  army  at  Chattanooga  for 
that  purpose,  he  assigned  General  Earl  Van  Dorn  to  the  Dis 
trict  of  Mississippi  and  Price  to  the  District  of  Tennessee,  the 
latter  to  hold  the  line  of  the  Mobile  and  Ohio  Railroad,  and 
both  were  to  confront  and  watch  Grant  and  prevent  him  from 
sending  reinforcements  to  Buell.  Price  was  left  at  Tupelo, 
Mississippi,  with  about  15,000  men.  Later,  September  nth, 
President  Davis  ordered  Van  Dorn  to  assume  command  of 
both  his  own  and  Price's  army,  the  latter  then  on  its  march  to 
luka,  Mississippi,  intending  to  move  thence  into  Middle  Ten 
nessee  if  it  should  be  found,  as  Bragg  was  led  to  believe,  that 

1  Ohio  in  the  War,  vol.  i.,  p.  93. 


Battle  of  luka  289 

Rosecrans  (who,  June  nth,  had  succeeded  Pope  in  command 
of  the  Army  of  the  Mississippi)  had  gone  with  his  army  to 
Nashville  to  reinforce  Buell.  Two  of  Grant's  divisions,  Fame's 
and  Jeff.  C.  Davis',  had  gone  there,  leaving  the  force  for  the 
defence  of  North  Mississippi  much  reduced.  Price  entered 
luka  September  I4th,  the  garrison  retiring  without  an  engage 
ment.  Price,  on  learning  Rosecrans  had  retired  on  Corinth, 
telegraphed  Van  Dorn  that  he  would  turn  back  and  co-operate 
in  an  attack  on  Corinth.  Bragg  telegraphed  him  to  hasten 
towards  Nashville.  Rosecrans  wired  Grant  to  "  watch  the  old 
wood-pecker  or  he  would  get  away  from  them."  September 
I /th,  Halleck  telegraphed  Grant  to  prevent  Price  from  cross 
ing  the  Tennessee  and  forming  a  junction  with  Bragg.  Grant 
telegraphed  he  would  "  do  everything  in  his  power  to  prevent 
such  a  catastrophe,"  and  he  began  concentrating  his  troops 
against  Price  at  luka.  General  E.  O.  C.  Ord  was  moved  to 
Burnsville,  where  Grant  established  his  headquarters,  and  Rose 
crans  marched  his  two  divisions  to  Jacinto,  with  orders  to 
move  on  luka,  flank  Price,  and  cut  off  his  retreat.  General 
Stephen  A.  Hurlburt  was  ordered  to  make  a  strong  demon 
stration  from  Bolivar,  Tennessee,  against  Van  Dorn,  then  near 
Grand  Junction  with  about  10,000  effective  men,  and  lead  him 
to  believe  he  was  in  immediate  danger  of  an  attack,  and  thus 
prevent  him  from  making  a  diversion  in  aid  of  Price  by  march 
ing  on  Corinth.  This  ruse  was  successful.  Orders  were  given 
by  Grant  and  preparation  was  made  by  Ord  to  attack  Price  at 
luka  as  soon  as  Rosecrans'  guns  on  the  Jacinto  road  were 
heard.  About  4  P.M.,  September  igth,  C.  S.  Hamilton's 
division,  under  Rosecrans,  attacked  Little's  division  of  Price's 
army  on  the  Jacinto  road,  and  a  severe  combat  ensued  until 
night,  with  varying  success,  both  sides  at  dark  claiming  a 
victory.  Neither  Grant  nor  Ord  heard  the  sound  of  the  battle 
in  consequence  of  an  intervening  dense  woods  and  an  unfavor 
able  wind.  Rosecrans  did  not  or  could  not  advise  Grant  of 
the  state  of  affairs,  and  the  latter  did  not  learn  of  the  battle 
until  8.30  A.M.  of  the  2Oth.  Price  retreated  in  the  night  with 
his  forces  towards  Baldwyn,  on  the  Mobile  and  Ohio  Railroad, 


VOL.  I.— 19 


290  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

whither  Grant  ordered  Ord  with  Hamilton's  and  Stanley's  divi 
sions  and  the  cavalry  to  pursue.  The  pursuit  was  ineffectual. 
The  battle  of  luka  was  fought  after  4  P.M.,  principally  by  two 
opposing  brigades,  each  about  4000  strong.  The  Union  loss 
was,  killed  I4i,*wounded  613,  missing  36,  total  790. 

The  Confederate  loss,  as  reported,  was,  killed  85,  wounded 
410,  missing  40,  total  535.' 

After  luka  Rosecrans  was  placed  in  command  at  Corinth, 
Grant  having  established  his  headquarters  at  Jackson,  Tennes 
see.  Hurlburt  was  at  Boliver,  Tennessee,  with  his  division. 
Though  Halleck  had  partly  constructed  defensive  works 
around  Corinth  on  occupying  it  in  May,  1862,  they  were  too 
remote  from  the  town  and  too  elaborate  for  a  small  army. 

Grant  had,  more  recently,  partly  constructed  some  open 
batteries  with  connecting  breastworks  on  College  Hill.  These 
Rosecrans  further  completed,  and  also  constructed  some  re 
doubts  to  cover  the  north  of  the  town. 

From  Ripley,  Mississippi,  September  29th,  Van  Dorn,  with 
his  own  and  Price's  army,  his  force  numbering  about  25,000, 
by  a  rapid  march  advanced  on  Corinth,  where  Rosecrans  could 
assemble  not  exceeding  18,500  men,  consisting  of  the  divisions 
of  Generals  David  S.  Stanley  and  C.  S.  Hamilton  and  the 
cavalry  division  of  Colonel  John  K.  Mizner,  of  the  Army  of 
the  Mississippi,  and  the  divisions  of  Generals  Thomas  A. 
Davies  and  Thomas  J.  McKean,  of  the  Army  of  the  Tennessee. 
It  was  not  known  certainly  until  the  3d  of  October  whether 
Van  Dorn  designed  to  attack  Bolivar,  Jackson,  or  Corinth. 
The  advance  of  Van  Dorn  and  Price  was  met  on  the  Chewalla 
road  by  Oliver's  brigade  of  McKean's  division,  which  was 
steadily  driven  back,  together  with  reinforcements  until,  at  10 
A.M.,  all  the  Union  troops  were  inside  the  old  Halleck  in 
trenched  line,  and  by  1.30  P.M.  the  Confederates  had  taken  it 
and  were  pushing  vigorously  towards  the  more  recently  estab 
lished  inner  line  of  intrenchments.  Price's  army  formed  on 
the  Confederate  left  and  Van  Dorn's  on  the  right.  The  brunt 
of  the  afternoon  battle  fell  on  McKean's  and  Davies'  divisions. 

1  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol.  ii.,  p.  736. 


Battles  of  Corinth  and  Hatchie  291 

General  Hackleman  of  Davies'  division  was  killed,  and  General 
Richard  J.  Oglesby  of  the  same  division  was  severely  wounded. 
The  Union  troops  engaged  lost  heavily.  One  brigade  of 
Stanley's  division  and  Sullivan's  brigade  of  Hamilton's  divi 
sion  late  in  the  day  came  to  the  relief  of  the  heavily  pressed 
Union  troops.  The  coming  of  night  put  an  end  to  the  battle, 
but  with  the  Confederate  Army  within  six  hundred  yards  of 
Corinth  and  the  Union  troops  mainly  behind  their  inner  and 
last  line  of  defence.  The  situation  was  critical.  The  morning 
of  the  4th  found  Rosecrans'  army  formed,  McKean  on  the  left, 
Stanley  and  Davies  to  his  right  in  the  order  named,  one  brig 
ade  of  Hamilton  on  the  extreme  right  and  the  rest  of  Hamil 
ton's  division  in  reserve  behind  the  right.1 

Van  Dorn  opened  fire  at  4.30  A.M.  with  artillery,  but  he  did 
not  advance  to  the  real  attack  until  about  8  A.M.  It  came 
from  north  of  the  town  and  fell  heaviest  on  Davies'  division. 
His  front  line  gave  way,  and  later  his  command  was  broken, 
and  some  of  the  Confederates  penetrated  the  town  and  to  where 
the  reserve  artillery  was  massed.  Stanley's  reserves,  however, 
speedily  fell  on  them  and  drove  them  out  with  great  loss. 
Then  the  attack  came  on  Battery-Robinett,  to  the  westward 
near  the  Union  centre.  Three  successive  charges  were  made 
in  column  on  this  battery  and  on  the  centre  with  the  greatest 
determination,  and  much  close  fighting  occurred  until  the  last 
assault  was  repulsed  about  1 1  A.M.  (October  4,  1862),  when  the 
enemy  fell  back  under  cover  beyond  cannon-shot.  Van  Dorn 
had  hoped  to  take  Corinth  on  the  3d,  and  now,  being  repulsed 
at  every  point,  he  beat  a  retreat,  knowing  Grant  would  not  be 
inactive.  It  was  not  until  about  2  P.M.  that  Rosecrans  ascer 
tained  the  enemy  had  commenced  a  retreat.2  General  James 
B.  McPherson  arrived,  October  4th,  from  Jackson  with  five 
regiments,  but  too  late  for  the  battle.  The  engagement  was 
a  severe  one ;  both  armies  fought  with  desperation  and  skill ; 
the  Union  troops,  being  outnumbered,  made  up  the  disparity 
by  fighting,  in  part,  behind  breastworks. 

1  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol.  ii.,  p.  744,  map. 

2  War  Records,  vol.  xvii.,  Part  I.,  pp.  158,170  ;  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol  ii.,  p.  752. 


292  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

The  losses  were  heavy,  especially  in  officers  of  rank.  The 
Union  loss  was,  killed  27  officers  and  328  men,  wounded  115 
officers  and  1726  men,  captured  or  missing  5  officers  and  319 
men;  grand  total,  2520.'  The  Confederate  loss  (as  stated  in 
Van  Dorn's  report8),  including  casualties  at  Hatchie  Bridge 
(October  5th),  was,  killed  594,  wounded  2162,  prisoners  or 
missing  2102;  grand  total,  4858. 

Grant,  besides  sending  McPherson  to  Rosecrans'  support, 
had  directed  Hurlburt  at  Bolivar  to  march  with  his  division 
on  the  enemy's  rear.  Hurlburt  started  on  the  4th  by  way  of 
Middletown  and  Pocahontas.  At  the  former  place  he  encoun 
tered  the  enemy's  cavalry  and  forced  them  by  night  to  and 
across  the  Big  Muddy,  where  the  division  encamped,  one 
brigade  having  taken  and  crossed  the  bridge  to  the  east  side. 
Hurlburt's  orders  from  Grant  were  to  reach  Rosecrans  at  all 
hazards.3  The  situation  for  Hurlburt  was  critical.  He  had 
in  front  of  his  single  division  both  Van  Dorn  and  Price.  But 
the  situation  was  in  a  high  degree  desperate  for  the  retreating 
army.  If  its  retreat  were  arrested  long  enough  for  Rosecrans' 
column  to  assail  it  in  the  rear  it  must  be  lost  or  dispersed.  It 
was  this  that  Grant  confidently  calculated  on.  On  the  morn 
ing  of  the  5th  Hurlburt  pushed  vigorously  forward  to  Davis' 
Bridge  over  the  Hatchie.  General  Ord  arrived  about  8  A.M. 
and  took  command  of  Hurlburt's  forces.  The  movement  had 
hardly  commenced  when  strong  resistance  was  met  with.  Ord 
pushed  the  enemy  back  for  about  three  miles  with  General 
Veach's  brigade,  taking  a  ridge — Metamora— about  one  mile 
from  the  Hatchie.  Here  a  severe  battle  ensued,  the  enemy 
was  driven  from  the  field  across  the  bridge,  and  a  portion  of 
Ord's  command  gained  a  position  just  east  of  the  river,  though 
not  without  much  loss.  Ord  was  himself  wounded  at  the 
bridge,  and  the  command  again  devolved  on  Hurlburt.  The 
latter  soon  thereafter  secured  a  permanent  lodgment  on  the  east 
of  the  Hatchie,  thus  effectually  stopping  the  retreat  of  Van 

1  War  Records,  vol.  xvii.,  Part  I.,  p.  176. 
*Ibid.,  p.  381  (382-4). 
3  Ibid.,  pp.  158,  308. 


Battles  of  Corinth  and  Hatchie  293 

Dorn  by  that  route  and  forcing  him  to  fall  back  and  find 
another  less  desirable  one.  Under  cover  of  night  Van  Dorn 
retreated  upon  another  road  to  the  southward,  and  crossed  the 
Hatchie  at  Crum's  Mill,  six  miles  farther  up  the  river.1 

The  success  of  Ord  and  Hurlburt  was  so  complete  that 
Grant  believed  Van  Dorn's  army  should  have  been  destroyed.* 

Rosecrans  did  not  move  from  Corinth  until  the  morning  of 
the  5th  of  October,  and  then  not  fast  or  far  enough  to  over 
take  Van  Dorn  in  the  throes  of  battle  with  Ord  and  Hurlburt 
or  in  time  to  cut  off  his  retreat  by  another  route.  Rosecrans 
gave  as  an  excuse  the  exhausted  condition  of  his  troops  after 
the  battle  of  the  4th.  At  2  P.M.,  the  last  day  of  the  battle, 
he  was  certain  the  enemy  had  decided  to  retreat,  yet  he 
directed  the  victorious  troops  to  proceed  to  their  camps,  pro 
vide  five  days'  rations,  take  food  and  rest,  and  be  ready  to 
move  early  the  next  morning.3  McPherson,  having  arrived 
with  a  fresh  brigade,  could  have  been  at  once  pushed  upon  the 
rear  of  Van  Dorn's  exhausted  troops.  Rosecrans'  army  went 
into  camp  again  in  the  afternoon  of  the  5th,  while  Ord  and 
Hurlburt  were  fighting  their  battle.  Although  the  pursuit 
was  resumed  by  Rosecrans  on  the  6th,  and  thereafter  continued 
to  Ripley,  it  was  after  the  flying  enemy  had  passed  beyond 
reach.  But  while  it  is  possible  that  Rosecrans  could  have 
done  better,  it  is  certain  that  he  and  his  troops  did  well;  Van 
Dorn's  diversion  in  favor  of  Bragg's  grand,  central  invasion,  at 
any  rate,  failed  amid  disaster. 

But  we  must  return  to  Bragg  and  Buell,  the  principal  actors 
in  the  march  to  Kentucky. 

Bragg's  army  commenced  to  cross  the  Tennessee  at  Chatta 
nooga  August  26,  1862,  and  immediately  set  out  to  the  north 
ward,  his  cavalry,  under  Wheeler,  keeping  well  towards  the 
foot  of  the  mountains  to  the  westward,  covering  and  masking 
the  real  movement.  Buell's  army,  as  we  have  stated,  was 

1  War  Records,  vol.  xvii.,  Part  I.,  pp.  205-8,  302,  322. 
*  Ibid.,  p.  158  ;  Grant's  Memoirs,  vol.  i.,  p.  417. 

3  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol.  ii.,  p.  753;  War  Records  (Rosecrans'  Report),  vol. 
xvii.,  Part  I.,  p.  170. 


294  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

concentrated  in  the  neighborhood  of  Dechard,  Tennessee,  with 
detachments  of  it  still  holding  Huntsville,  Battle  Creek,  and 
Murfreesboro. 

Numerous  and  generally  unimportant  skirmishes  took  place 
at  Battle  Creek  and  other  places.  Murfreesboro  was  surprised 
and  disgracefully  surrendered  to  Forrest's  cavalry  July  I3th, 
and  Morgan's  forces  captured  Gallatin,  Tennessee,  August 
1 2th;  but  these  places  were  not  held. 

Bragg  continued  his  march  through  Pikeville  and  Sparta, 
Tennessee,  crossing  the  Cumberland  at  Carthage  and  Gaines- 
borough.  Uniting  his  army  at  Hopkinsville,  Kentucky,  he 
proceeded  through  Glasgow  to  Munfordville,  on  Green  River, 
where  there  was  a  considerable  fortification,  occupied  by 
Colonel  J.  T.  Wilder  with  about  4000  men. 

Buell,  after  having  sent  some  of  his  divisions  as  far  east  into 
the  mountains  as  Jasper,  Altamont,  and  McMinnville,  with  no 
results,  moved  his  army  to  Nashville,  thence  with  the  re 
inforcements  from  Grant  (two  divisions),  leaving  two  divisions 
and  some  detachments  ynder  Thomas  to  hold  that  city, 
through  Tyree  Springs  and  Franklin  to  Bowling  Green,  Ken 
tucky,  the  advance  arriving  there  September  nth.1  Bragg  was 
then  at  Glasgow.  General  James  R.  Chalmers  and  Colonel 
Scott,  each  with  a  brigade,  the  former  of  infantry,  the  other  of 
cavalry,  attacked,  and  Chalmers'  brigade  assaulted  Wilder's 
position  September  I4th.  The  assault  was  repelled  with 
much  slaughter,  Chalmers'  loss  being  3  officers  and  32  men 
killed  and  28  officers  and  225  men  wounded.2  Chalmers  then 
retired  to  Cave  City,  but  returned  with  Bragg's  main  army  on 
the  i6th.  Bragg  having  his  army  up,  with  Folk's  corps  north 
of  Munfordville  and  Hardee's  south  of  the  river,  opened  nego 
tiations  for  the  surrender  of  the  place.  Being  completely  sur 
rounded,  with  heavy  batteries  on  all  sides,  Wilder  capitulated, 
including  4133  officers  and  men.  Chalmers  was  designated  to 
take  possession  of  the  surrendered  works  on  the  morning  of 
the  l/th.  Had  Buell  marched  promptly  on  Munfordville  from 

1  Atlas,    War  Records,  Part  V.,  plate  24. 
9  War  Records,  vol.  xvi.,  Part  I.,  p.  978. 


Bragg  Invades  Kentucky — Buell  Follows     295 

Bowling  Green  he  would  have  found  Bragg  with  one  half  of 
his  army  south  of  Green  River  and  Polk  with  the  other  half 
north  of  it,  and  Wilder  still  holding  a  position  on  the  river 
between  the  two. 

Bragg,  after  the  surrender,  concentrated  his  army  south  of 
Green  River  opposite  Munfordville  along  a  low  crest  of  hills. 
He  had  not  yet  formed  a  junction  with  Kirby  Smith,  and  his 
force  then  in  position  probably  did  not  much  exceed 

20,000.' 

The  position  had  no  special  advantages,  was  well  known  to 
many  of  Buell's  officers,  and  should  have  been  to  Buell  him 
self.  In  case  of  defeat,  Bragg's  army  must  have  been  lost  and 
Kirby  Smith's  left  to  the  same  fate.  Green  River,  passable 
in  few  places  in  Bragg's  rear  and  to  the  north,  would  have 
rendered  retreat  impossible  for  a  defeated  army,  and,  besides, 
Bragg  had  no  base  north  to  retreat  to.  The  situation  was 
well  understood  in  our  army,  except  by  Buell,  who  seemed  to 
fear  a  junction  with  Kirby  Smith  had  been  formed,  though 
Wilder  (just  paroled)  and  others  of  his  officers  on  the  day  of 
the  surrender  informed  Buell  that  no  junction  had  been  made. 
Wilder,  however,  had  an  exaggerated  opinion  of  Bragg's 
strength  at  Munfordville.  The  junction  of  the  two  Confeder 
ate  armies  did  not  take  place  until  October  gth,  at  Harrodsburg, 
the  day  succeeding  the  battle  of  Perryville.3 

Buell  had,  south  of  Bragg,  not  less  than  50,000  effective 
men.  He  since  admits  he  had  35,000  men  present  before  he 
ordered  Thomas'  division  and  other  troops  up  from  Nash 
ville.2  Thomas  arrived  on  the  iQth  and  2Oth.  There  was 
some  skirmishing  on  the  2Oth,  and  Bragg  was  then  permitted 
to  withdraw  without  further  molestation  across  the  river, 
whence  he  marched  northward.  The  slowness  of  the  move 
ment  of  Buell's  army  from  Nashville  to  Bowling  Green  and, 
after  delaying  there  five  days,  thence  towards  Munfordville, 
was  freely  commented  on  by  his  army  at  the  time.  It  was 
composed  of  seasoned  and  experienced  troops,  eager  to  find 

1  War  Records,  vol.  xvi.,  Part  I.,  pp.  966,  970. 

2  Battles  and  Leader -s,  vol.  iii.,  pp.  603-42. 


296  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

the  enemy  and  to  give  him  battle.1  In  the  history  of  no  war 
was  a  more  favorable  opportunity  presented  to  fight  and  reap 
a  victor's  fruits  than  at  Green  River,  but  the  time  and  men  for 
great  and  controlling  successes  were  not  yet  come. 

The  water  supply  northward  of  Bowling  Green,  already 
spoken  of,  was  at  best  poor  and  deficient,  especially  in  the  hot 
September  weather.  The  pools  or  ponds,  befouled  by  the 
shooting  in  the  February  preceding  of  diseased  and  broken- 
down  animals  of  Hardee's  army  on  its  retirement  from  Bowl 
ing  Green,  contained  the  most  noxious  and  revolting  water, 
yet  it  was  at  one  time,  for  a  large  part  of  the  army,  all  that 
was  to  be  had  for  man  or  beast.  I  remember  Colonel  John 
Beatty  and  I,  on  one  occasion  near  Cave  City,  stood  in  a  hard 
rain  storm  holding  the  corners  of  a  rubber  blanket  so  as  to 
catch  a  supply  of  water  to  slake  our  thirst.  The  army,  how 
ever,  as  was  generally  the  case  when  moving,  suffered  little 
from  sickness. 

The  wagon  train  of  Buell's  army  was  dispatched  with  a 
cavalry  guard  from  Bowling  Green  on  a  road  to  the  westward 
of  Munfordville  through  Brownsville,  Litchfield,  and  Big 
Spring  to  West  Point  at  the  mouth  of  Salt  River  on  the  Ohio, 
thence  to  Louisville.9 

Bragg  continued  his  march  unmolested  and  unresisted  north 
from  Green  River  along  the  railroad  to  near  Nolin,  thence 
northwestward  by  Hodgensville  to  Bardstown,  then  through 
Perryville  to  Harrodsburg,  some  part  of  his  army  going  as  far 
as  Lawrenceburg,  Lexington,  and  Frankfort.2 

Buell  marched  after  Bragg  to  near  Nolin,  thence  keeping  to 
the  west  through  Elizabethtown  and  West  Point  to  Louisville, 
the  advance,  General  Thomas'  division,  arriving  there  Sep 
tember  25th,  and  the  last  division  the  2Qth.  Both  train  and 


1  While  the  army  was  massed  at  Dripping  Spring,  a  beef-ox  escaped  from  a  herd 
about  midnight,  and  in  wild  frenzy  rushed  back  and  forth  through  the  army,  jump 
ing  on  and  running  over  the  bivouacked  sleeping  soldiers,  seriously  injuring  many, 
until  a  large  part  of  the  army  was  alarmed  and  called  up.  He  was  finally  sur 
rounded  and  bayoneted  to  death. 

*  Atlas,    War  Records,  Part  V.,  plate  24. 


Bragg  Invades  Kentucky — Buell  Follows    297 

army  reaching  the  city  in  safety  had  the  effect,  at  least,  of 
relieving  the  place  from  further  danger  of  capture,  and  for  this 
Buell  had  due  credit,  though  the  country  and  the  authorities 
at  Washington  were  highly  displeased  with  the  result  of  his 
campaign. 

Cumberland  Gap,  for  want  of  supplies,  was,  on  the  night  of 
the  1 7th  of  September,  evacuated  by  General  George  W. 
Morgan,  and  though  pursued  by  General  Stevenson  and  John 
Morgan's  cavalry,  he  made  his  way  through  Manchester, 
Booneville,  West  Liberty,  and  Grayson  to  Greenup,  on  the 
Ohio,  arriving  there  the  2d  of  October.  Stevenson  then 
rejoined  Kirby  Smith  at  Frankfort. 

It  is  true  Nashville  was  still  held  by  the  Union  forces,  but 
Northern  Alabama  and  nearly  all  else  in  Middle  Tennessee 
occupied  during  the  campaigns  of  the  previous  spring  were 
lost  or  abandoned.  Grant  alone  held  his  ground  in  Northern 
Mississippi  and  Western  Tennessee,  and  his  army  had  been 
dangerously  depleted  t6  reinforce  Buell. 

Clarksville,  on  the  Cumberland  below  Nashville,  in  Grant's 
department,  was  captured,  August  18,  1862,  and  some  steam 
boats  and  some  supplies  were  there  taken  and  destroyed. 
Colonel  Rodney  Mason  (7ist  Ohio)  was  in  command,  and  had 
under  him  at  the  time  only  about  225  men.  His  position  was 
not  a  good  one  for  defence;  he  had  no  fortifications,  and  was 
without  cavalry  to  give  him  information  of  the  approach  or 
strength  of  the  enemy.  It  was  variously  claimed  that  Mason 
surrendered  to  only  a  few  irregular  cavalry  with  no  artillery, 
and  without  firing  a  gun,  on  being  deceived  into  the  belief 
that  he  was  surrounded  by  a  superior  force  with  six  pieces  of 
artillery.1  The  War  Department,  somewhat  hastily,  August 
22d,  by  order,  without  trial,  dismissed  Colonel  Mason  from  the 
service.  This  order  was  revoked  March  22,  I866.1  Twelve 
officers  of  the  regiment  signed  a  statement  to  the  effect  that 
they  had  advised  the  surrender.  For  this  the  War  Depart 
ment  mustered  them  out  August  29,  1862.  The  President 
directed  the  order  revoked  as  to  Captain  Sol.  J.  Houck, 

1  War  Records,  vol.  xvi..  Part  I.,  pp.  862-8. 


298  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

because  he  signed  the  statement  under  a  misapprehension  of  its 
contents.1  The  order  dismissing  the  others  was  revoked  after 
the  war,  except  as  to  Lieutenant  Ira  L.  Morris,  who  enlisted 
in  1864  as  a  private  soldier,  and  was  thereupon  honorably  dis 
charged  as  a  Lieutenant. 

The  Confederate  Army  was  now  in  occupancy  of  Frankfort, 
Lexington,  Cumberland  Gap,  and  most  of  middle  Kentucky. 
Buell's  army,  largely  reinforced  by  fresh  troops  and  number 
ing,  present  for  duty,  65,886,3  was  apparently  besieged  at 
Louisville.  Nelson  had  retired  there  from  his  disaster  at 
Richmond  (August  3Oth),  and  had  collected  a  very  consider 
able  army  and  thrown  up  some  breastworks. 

At  West  Point  I  obtained  permission  to  proceed  with  the 
advance  of  the  army  to  Louisville,  having  previously  been 
notified  of  my  appointment  as  Colonel  of  a  newly-organized 
regiment. 

On  reaching  Louisville  I  first  saw  President  Lincoln's  22d  of 
September  Proclamation,  announcing  that  on  January  I,  1863, 
he  would  proclaim  all  slaves  within  States  or  designated  parts 
of  a  State,  the  people  whereof  should  be  in  rebellion,  "thence 
forward  and  forever  free."  The  idea  of  prosecuting  the  war 
for  the  liberation  of  slaves  in  rebellious  States  had,  to  say  the 
least,  not  been  fostered  in  Buell's  army,  hence  there  was  much 
criticism  of  this  proclamation  by  officers,  and  some  foolish 
threats  of  resigning  rather  than  "  fight  for  the  freedom  of  the 
negro."  Even  the  army,  fighting  patriotically  to  suppress  the 
rebellion,  did  not  then  fully  appreciate  that  it  was  not  in  God's 
divine  plan  that  peace  should  ever  come  to  our  stricken  country 
until  our  banner  of  liberty  waved  over  none  but  freemen. 

On  the  24th  of  September  the  President  issued  an  order 
creating  the  Department  of  the  Tennessee  and  assigned  to  its 
command  Major-General  George  H.  Thomas;  and  the  same 
day  Buell  was  ordered  to  turn  his  command  over  to  him  and 
to  retire  to  Indianapolis.3  These  orders  were  forwarded  by 

1  War  Records,  vol.  xvi,,  Part  I.,  p.  862-8. 

*  Ibid.,  Part  II.,  p.  564. 

*  Ibid.,  pp.   539,  554-5,  560. 


General  Thomas  299 

Colonel  McKibben,  but  not  delivered  until  the  29th.1  Buell 
immediately  turned  over  his  command  to  Thomas,  but  the 
latter,  with  his  natural  modesty,  protested  against  accepting 
it  in  the  emergency.  Halleck  suspended  the  order,  and  Buell 
again  resumed  command,  announcing  Thomas  as  second  in 
command.1 

More  than  a  year  elapsed  before  General  Thomas  was  again 
given  so  important  a  command  as  the  one  he  thus  declined, 
and  then  he  relieved  Rosecrans  and  took  command  of  the 
Army  of  the  Cumberland  when  it  was  besieged  by  Bragg  at 
Chattanooga.  Thomas,  though  diffident  to  a  degree,  was  one 
of  our  greatest  soldiers.  He  served  uninterruptedly  from  the 
opening  to  the  close  of  the  war,  distinguishing  himself  in  many 
battles,  especially  at  Stone's  River,  at  Chickamauga,  on  the 
Atlanta  campaign  (1864),  and  at  Nashville,  December  15  and 
16,  1864.  He  was  admired,  almost  adored,  by  the  soldiers  of 
the  Army  of  the  Cumberland,  and  he  deserved  their  affection. 
His  principal  characteristics  differed  from  those  of  Grant, 
Sherman,  Meade,  or  Sheridan,  who,  though  great  soldiers, 
each  differed  in  disposition,  temper,  and  quality  from  the 
others.  General  Thomas,  being  a  Virginian  by  birth,  was  at 
first  expected  and  coaxed  to  go  into  the  rebellion,  then  later 
he  was  abused  and  slandered  by  statements  coming  from  the 
South  to  the  effect  that  he  had  contemplated  going  with  his 
State.  There  is  no  evidence  that  he  ever  wavered  in  his  loyalty 
to  the  Union. 

I  had  Grant's  opinion  of  General  Thomas  as  a  commanding 
officer  when  I  was  making  an  official  call  on  him  at  City  Point, 
December  5,  1864,  just  at  the  time  Hood  was  besieging  Nash 
ville.  Grant  had  been  urging  Thomas  to  fight  Hood  and  raise 
the  siege,  fearing,  as  Grant  then  said,  Hood  would  cross  the 
Cumberland  and  make  a  winter  raid  into  Kentucky.  Thomas 
refused  to  fight  until  fully  ready.  Grant,  after  inquiring  of 
me  about  the  roads  and  hills  around  the  south  of  Nashville, 
of  which  I  had  acquired  some  knowledge  in  the  spring  and  fall 
of  1862,  said,  somewhat  impatiently: 

1  War  Records,  vol.  xvi.,  Part  II.,  pp.  554-5,  560. 


300  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

"  Thomas  is  a  great  soldier,  and  though  able,  at  any  time,  with 
his  present  force  to  whip  Hood,  he  lacks  confidence  in  himself  and 
the  disposition  to  assume  the  offensive  until  he  has  seventy-five  per 
centum  of  the  chances  of  battle,  in  his  own  opinion,  in  favor  of 
success." 

Thomas  was  born  July  31,  1816,  and  died  in  San  Francisco, 
March  28,  1870.  His  body  is  buried  at  Troy,  N.  Y.  Sher 
man,  in  command  of  the  army,  in  announcing  his  death,  said: 

"  The  very  impersonation  of  honesty,  integrity  and  honor,  he  will 
stand  to  posterity  as  the  beau-ideal  of  the  soldier  and  gentleman. 
Though  he  leaves  no  child  to  bear  his  name,  the  old  Army  of  the 
Cumberland,  numbered  by  tens  of  thousands,  called  him  father,  and 
will  weep  for  him  in  tears  of  manly  grief." 

I  witnessed,  in  principal  part,  a  great  tragedy  resulting  from 
a  quarrel  between  high  officers  of  the  Union  Army.  This 
occurred  September  29,  1862,  at  the  Gait  House,  Louisville, 
whither  I  had  repaired  to  tender  my  resignation  to  Buell  as 
Lieutenant-Colonel  of  the  3d  Ohio  Infantry,  to  enable  me  to 
accept  promotion. 

General  Jeff.  C.  Davis  had  been  in  command  of  a  division 
under  General  William  Nelson  at  Louisville,  and  had  in  some 
way  incurred  Nelson's  censure.  Nelson  relieved  him  of  com 
mand  and  ordered  him  to  report  to  Wright,  the  department 
commander,  at  Cincinnati.  Wright  ordered  Davis  to  return 
to  Louisville  and  report  to  Buell  for  duty.  Davis,  being  from 
Indiana,  returned  via  Indianapolis,  and  from  there  was  accom 
panied  to  Louisville  by  Governor  Oliver  P.  Morton,  who,  with 
another  friend,  was  with  Davis  in  the  vestibule  of  the  Gait 
House  about  9  A.M.  when  Davis  accosted  Nelson,  demanding 
satisfaction  for  the  injustice  he  claimed  had  been  done  him, 
and,  it  was  said,  at  the  same  time  flipped  a  paper  wad  in  Nel 
son's  face.1  Nelson  retorted  by  slapping  Davis  in  the  face  with 
the  back  of  his  hand,  and  then,  after  denouncing  Morton  as 
Davis'  "abettor  of  the  deliberate  insult,"  at  once  passed  from 

1  Battles  and  Leader s,  vol.  iii.,  pp.  43,  6l. 


Davis  Kills  Nelson  301 

the  vestibule  to  an  adjoining  hallway  and  started  up  the  steps 
of  a  stairway,  apparently  going  towards  his  room.  He  soon, 
however,  returned  to  the  hall  and  walked  quietly  in  the  direc 
tion  of  Davis.  The  latter  meantime  had  obtained  a  pistol  from 
his  friend,  and  as  Nelson  approached  fired  on  him,  the  bullet 
striking  Nelson  in  the  left  breast,  just  over  the  heart,  produc 
ing  what  proved,  in  half  an  hour,  to  be  a  mortal  wound.1 
The  incident  was  a  deplorable  one.  Nelson  was  an  able, 
valuable  officer,  and  had  proved  himself  such  on  many  fields. 
He  was  known  to  be  hasty,  and  sometimes  unwarrantably 
rough  in  his  treatment  of  others,  yet  he  promptly  repented 
of  any  act  of  injustice  and  made  amends  as  far  as  possible. 
Davis  was  placed  in  military  arrest  by  Buell,  but  later  was  re 
leased,  by  orders  from  Washington,  to  be  allowed  to  become 
amenable  to  civil  authority.  Still  later  he  was  restored  to  the 
command  of  a  division,  then  given  a  corps,  and,  by  his  gal 
lantry,  soldierly  bearing,  and  general  good  conduct  to  the  end 
of  the  war,  atoned  in  some  degree  for  the  bloody  deed. 

My  resignation  was  accepted  on  this  memorable  2Qth  of 
September,  1862,  and  thenceforth  my  official  connection  with 
my  first  regiment,  its  gallant  officers  and  soldiers,  and  with  the 
noble  Army  of  the  Ohio  and  the  other  great  armies  of  the 
West,  ceased,  and  forever,  and  not  without  the  deepest  regret, 
especially  in  parting  from  Colonel  John  Beatty,  with  whom  I 
had,  as  more  than  a  friend  and  companion,  eaten  and  slept, 
marched  and  bivouacked,  on  the  closest  terms  of  confidence, 
without  receiving  from  him  an  unkind  or  ungenerous  word, 
for  seventeen  months,  although  he  was  my  immediate  superior 
officer,  and  we  had  both  gone  through  many  hardships  and 
vexatious  trials  together.  This  was  the  more  remarkable  as  we 
were  each  of  sanguine  temperament  and  obstinate  by  nature. 

Beatty  was  appointed  by  President  Lincoln  a  Brigadier- 
General  of  Volunteers,  November  29,  1862,  and  he  thereafter, 
as  before  at  Perryville,  especially  distinguished  himself  at 
Stone's  River  and  Chickamauga.  He  has  since  served  three 
terms  in  Congress  with  distinction. 

1  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol.  iii.,  pp,  43,  61. 


302  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

It  was  my  good  fortune  to  meet  and  shake  hands,  one  year 
and  about  eight  months  later,  with  some  of  the  survivors  of 
this  Western  army  at  Greensborough,  North  Carolina,  after 
Lee's  surrender,  and  on  the  occasion  of  the  surrender  of  Joe 
Johnston's  army  to  Sherman. 

Although  my  humble  connection  with  Buell's  army  ceased 
at  Louisville,  I  will  summarize  its  history,  covering  a  few  days 
longer. 

Folk's  and  Hardee's  corps  constituting  Bragg's  army  we  left 
in  the  vicinity  of  Bardstown  and  Harrodsburg,  with  some  por 
tions  at  Frankfort  and  Lexington.  Kirby  Smith  was  at  Sal- 
visa,  about  twenty  miles  northeast  of  Perryville,  with  the  main 
body  of  his  army,  and,  believing  he  would  be  the  first  attacked, 
called  loudly  for  reinforcement,  and  Bragg  sent  him,  on  the 
eve  of  Perryville,  Withers  and  Cheatham's  divisions  from 
Polk  and  Hardee's  corps,  Bragg  placed  Polk  in  command  of 
his  army  in  the  vicinity  of  Perryville,  and  repaired  to  Frankfort 
to  witness  the  inauguration  (October  4th)  of  a  new  Secession 
Provisional  Governor  of  Kentucky — Richard  Hawes  * — her 
former  one,  George  W.  Johnson,  having  been  killed  at  Shiloh 
while  fighting  as  a  private  soldier. 

Buell,  being  further  reinforced  with  new  troops,  mostly  from 
Ohio  and  Indiana,  commenced,  October  2d,  a  general  move 
ment  against  both  Bragg  and  Smith.  General  Joshua  W.  Sill's 
division  of  General  Alexander  McD.  McCook's  corps,  followed 
by  General  Ebenezer  Dumont  with  a  raw  division,  moved 
through  Shelbyville  towards  Frankfort.  McCook,  with  the 
two  remaining  divisions  of  the  First  Corps,  commanded,  re 
spectively,  by  Generals  L.  H.  Rousseau  and  James  S.  Jackson, 
moved  from  Bloomfield  to  Taylorsville,  where  he  halted  the 
second  night.  Crittenden's  corps  marched  via  Bardstowrn  on 
the  Lebanon  and  Danville  road,  which  passed  about  four  miles 
to  the  south  of  Pqrryville,  with  a  branch  to  it.  Gilbert's 
corps  moved  on  the  more  direct  road  to  Perryville.  Thomas, 
second  in  command,  accompanied  Crittenden  on  the  right,  and 
Buell  kept  his  headquarters  with  Gilbert's  corps,  the  centre 

1  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol.  iii.,  pp.  47,  602. 


Battle  of  Perryville  303 

one  in  the  movements.  As  the  Union  columns  advanced,  the 
armies  of  Bragg  and  Kirby  Smith  found  it  necessary  to  com 
mence  concentrating.  For  some  reason,  not  warranted  by 
good  strategy,  two  points  of  concentration  were  designated 
by  Bragg,  Perryville  and  Salvisa,  twenty  miles  apart.  Smith 
persisted  in  the  belief  he  would  be  the  first  to  be  struck  by 
the  advancing  army. 

General  Sill,  on  the  road  to  Frankfort,  encountered  some 
opposition  on  the  3d,  but  on  the  4th  pressed  the  enemy  back 
so  close  that  the  booming  of  his  cannon  interrupted  Richard 
Hawes  in  the  reading  of  his  inaugural  address.  Bragg,  while 
witnessing  the  ceremony,  received  dispatches  announcing  the 
near  approach  of  the  Union  column.1  This  led  to  a  general 
stampede  of  the  assembly,  most  of  which  was  Confederate  mili 
tary,  and  the  inaugural  was  never  finished.  Hawes  fled  from 
the  capital,  half  inaugurated,  accompanying  the  army,  and 
this  was  about  the  last  heard  of  a  secession  Governor  of 
Kentucky. 

Bragg  personally  hurried  to  Harrodsburg  and  there  met  Polk, 
who  gave  him  news  of  the  movements  of  his  army  and  of  the 
approach  of  the  Union  columns.  Bragg  reached  the  conclu 
sion  that  the  wide  front  covered  by  the  Union  forces  (about 
fifteen  miles)  afforded  an  opportunity  to  beat  a  part  of  them 
in  an  early  engagement,  and  he  therefore,  at  5.40  P.M.  of  the 
7th,  ordered  Polk  to  recall  Cheatham's  division, hitherto  ordered 
to  reinforce  Smith,  and  to  form  a  junction  with  Hardee's  corps 
near  Perryville,  and  there  give  battle  immediately,  and  then 
move  to  Versailles,  whither  Smith  was  ordered  with  his  army.2 
McCook  was  turned  directly  on  Perryville  and  Sill  was  ordered 
in  the  same  direction.  Buell,  at  7  P.M.  of  the  7th,  seemed  to 
be  aware  that  stubborn  resistance  would  be  met  with  the  next 
day  at  Perryville.  He  so  advised  General  Thomas.3  Polk, 
with  Cheatham's  division,  reached  Perryville  about  midnight 
of  the  7th,  and  the  troops  were  placed  in  position  on  a  line  pre- 

1  Battles  and  Leaders,  vol.  iii.,  pp.  602,  47. 

2  War  Records,  vol.  xvi.,  Part  I.,  pp.  1092-6. 
*  Ibid.,  Part  II.,  p.  580. 


304  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

viously  established  with  the  expectation  that  a  battle  would  be 
opened  early  the  following  morning.  The  Confederate  troops 
thus  in  position  numbered  about  18,000,  while  immediately 
opposed  to  them  were  no  divisions  yet  in  position,  and,  in  fact, 
no  real  preparation  for  battle  had  been  made  on  the  Union 
side.  There  was  some  skirmishing  on  the  Confederate  extreme 
left  in  the  night,  between  Colonel  Dan.  McCook's  brigade  of 
Sheridan's  division,  for  the  possession  of  the  water  in  Doctor's 
Fork,  but  nothing  more. 

Bragg,  at  Harrodsburg,  not  hearing  the  battle  open  at  dawn, 
hastened  to  Perry ville,  and  there  learned  at  10  A.M.  that  a 
council  of  Confederate  generals  had  been  held,  on  Folk's  sug 
gestion,  at  which  it  was  determined  to  act  only  on  the  defensive. 
He,  however,  after  some  reconnoissances  and  adjustment  of 
the  lines,  ordered  Polk  to  bring  on  an  engagement.1 

McCook  with  his  two  divisions  came  within  about  three 
miles  of  Perry  ville  about  10.30  A.M.  of  the  8th,  and  there  en 
countered  some  resistance,  and  later  his  troops  were  advanced 
and  formed  with  the  right  of  Rousseau's  division,  resting  near 
a  barn  south  of  the  Perryville  and  Mackville  road,  its  left  ex 
tending  on  a  ridge  through  a  corn  field  to  a  wood  occupied  by 
the  2d  and  33d  Ohio.  The  right  of  General  William  R.  Ter- 
rill's  brigade  of  Jackson's  division  rested  on  woods  to  the  left 
of  Rousseau,  his  left  forming  a  crotchet  to  the  rear.  Stark 
weather  and  Webster's  brigades  of  Rousseau  and  Jackson's 
divisions,  respectively,  were  posted  by  McCook  in  support  of 
the  line  named.  Sheridan  and  R.  B.  Mitchell's  divisions  of 
the  Third  Corps  were  posted,  not  in  preparation  for  battle, 
several  hundred  yards  to  McCook's  right,  but  supposed  to  be 
near  enough  to  protect  it.a 

Save  some  clashes  of  the  skirmish  lines  and  bodies  seeking 
positions,  no  fierce  engagement  took  place  until  2  P.M.,  when 
a  determined  attack  in  force  fell  on  Terrill's  brigade,  causing 
it  to  soon  give  way,  General  James  S.  Jackson,  division  com 
mander,  being  killed  at  the  first  fire,  and  Terrill  fell  soon  after. 
McCook  had  previously  (about  12.30  P.M.)  ridden  to  Buell's 

1  War  Records,  vol.  xvi.,  Part  I.,  1092-3.  ^  Ibid.,  p.  1040. 


Battle  of  Perryville  3°5 

headquarters,  about  two  and  a  half  miles  distant,  and  informed 
him  of  the  situation,  but  this  did  not  awaken  him  to  the  appre 
hension  that  a  battle  was  about  to  be  fought.  McCook's  entire 
command  present  on  the  field  \vas  soon  engaged  against  great 
odds.  Of  this  Captain  Fisher  of  McCook's  staff  informed  Buell 
in  his  tent  at  3.30  or  4  P.M.,  and  Buell  claimed  it  was  his  first 
news  that  a  battle  had  been  raging  on  his  front. 

Polk,  with  three  divisions  of  infantry  and  a  complement  of 
artillery,  and  with  cavalry  on  each  flank,  had  fallen  on  the  two 
unsupported  divisions  of  McCook,  choosing  his  place  and  man 
ner  of  attack  skilfully.  Rousseau's  right  was  struck  soon  after 
Terrill's  brigade  was  driven  back,  and  the  whole  of  his  division 
was  soon  in  action.  The  Confederates  advanced  under  cover 
of  their  artillery  fire,  outflanking  Rousseau's  right.  His  troops 
stood  to  the  work  against  odds  and  made  a  most  gallant  resist 
ance.  Their  right  was  turned,  when  Gilbert's  idle  corps  was 
near  enough  to  have  come  at  once  into  action  and  afforded  it 
protection.  McCook's  command,  though  suffering  much,  was 
not  driven  from  the  field.  My  old  regiment  occupied  the  crest 
of  a  hill,  its  right  behind  a  hay-barn.  In  this  position,  under 
Colonel  John  Beatty,  it  fought,  exposed  to  a  heavy  fire  from 
the  enemy's  batteries  and  to  a  front  and  flank  fire  from  his 
infantry.  The  barn  at  last  took  fire,  and  its  flames  were  so  hot 
the  right  of  the  regiment  was  forced  to  temporarily  give  way. 
Its  loss  was  190  of  its  then  500  men  in  line,  including  Captains 
Cunard  and  McDougal  and  Lieutenants  St.  John  and  Starr 
among  the  killed.  Colonel  W.  H.  Lytle,  commanding  the 
brigade,  was  wounded  and  captured. 

The  Confederates  gained  possession  temporarily  of  only  por 
tions  of  the  battle-ground,  and  night  found  McCook's  corps 
still  confronting  them. 

Sheridan  and  R.  B.  Mitchell's  divisions  of  the  Third  Corps 
in  the  evening  made  some  diversion,  driving  back  and  threat 
ening  Folk's  left.  Buell  late  in  the  day  ordered  reinforcements 
sent  to  McCook,  but  they  reached  him  too  late  for  the  battle. 
Polk  claimed  a  victory,  but  while  he  had  some  temporary 
success,  both  armies  slept  on  the  field. 


VOL.   I. — 20. 


306  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

The  failure  of  Buell  to  know  or  hear  of  the  battle  until  too 
late  to  put  his  numerous  troops  near  the  field  into  it  was  the 
subject  of  much  comment.  Had  Crittenden  and  Gilbert  been 
pushed  forward  while  Bragg's  forces  were  engaged  with  Mc- 
Cook,  his  army  should  have  been  cut  off,  captured,  or  dis 
persed  ;  Kirby  Smith's,  lying  farther  to  the  north,  would  also 
have  been  imperilled. 

Such  an  opportunity  never  occurred  again  in  the  war.  It 
is  said  Buell  was  in  his  tent  and  the  winds  were  unfavorable. 
But  where  were  his  staff  officers,  who  should  furnish  eyes  and 
ears  for  their  General  ? 

The  Union  loss  was  39  officers  and  806  men  killed,  94  officers 
and  2757  men  wounded,  total  3696';  and  captured  or  missing 
13  officers  and  502  men,  grand  total  4211.  Of  these  Rousseau's 
division  lost  18  officers  and  466  men  killed,  and  52  officers  and 
1468  men  wounded,  total  2004;  and  Jackson's  division  lost  6 
officers  and  81  men  killed,  and  8  officers  and  338  men  wounded, 
total  433 ;  grand  total,  two  divisions,  2437.  The  few  others 
killed  and  wounded  were  of  the  three  divisions  of  the  Third 
Corps.1 

The  Confederate  loss,  as  reported  by  General  Polk,  was  5 10 
killed  and  2635  wounded,  total  3145;  captured  251,  grand 
total  3396.' 

Bragg  withdrew  from  the  field  of  Perryville  during  the  night 
after  the  battle  and  united  his  army  with  Smith's  at  Harrods- 
burg.  Commencing  October  I3th,  he  retreated  through 
Southeastern  Kentucky  via  Cumberland  Gap  to  the  Tennes 
see,  thence  transferred  his  army  to  Murfreesboro,  to  which 
place  Breckinridge,  also  Forrest's  cavalry,  had  been  previously 
sent. 

Thus  the  great  invasion  ended.  It  bore  none  of  the  antici 
pated  fruits.  Both  Bragg  and  Kirby  Smith  felt  keenly  the 
disappointment  that  Kentucky's  sons  did  not  rally  under  their 
standards.  Bragg  frequently  remarked  while  in  Kentucky: 
'  The  people  here  have  too  many  fat  cattle  and  are  too  well 
off  to  fight." 

1  War  Records,  vol.  xvi.,  Part  I.,  pp.  1033,  1112. 


Battle  of  Perryville  307 

From  Bryantsville  he  wrote  the  Adjutant-General  at  Rich 
mond  : 

' '  The  campaign  here  was  predicated  on  the  belief  and  the  most 
positive  assurances  that  the  people  of  this  country  would  rise  in 
mass  to  assert  their  independence.  No  people  ever  had  so  favor 
able  an  opportunity,  but  I  am  distressed  to  add  there  is  little  or  no 
disposition  to  avail  of  it."  ' 

The  conception  of  the  invasion  was  admirable,  and  the 
execution  of  the  campaign  was  vigorous,  and,  under  all  the 
circumstances,  skilful,  but  if  the  Army  of  the  Ohio  had  been 
rapidly  moved  and  boldly  fought,  together  with  its  numerous 
auxiliaries,  both  Bragg  and  Kirby  Smith's  armies  would  have 
been  separately  beaten-  and  destroyed. 

Buell's  army  pursued  the  enemy  from  Kentucky,  and  finally 
concentrated  in  front  of  Nashville.  By  direction  of  the  Presi 
dent,  October  24,  1862,  the  State  of  Tennessee  east  of  the 
Tennessee  River  and  Northern  Alabama  and  Georgia  became 
the  Department  of  the  Cumberland,  and  General  W.  S.  Rose- 
crans  was  assigned  to  its  command,  his  troops  to  constitute  the 
Fourteenth  Army  Corps.2  Buell  was,  at  the  same  date, 
ordered  to  turn  over  his  command  to  Rosecrans.  The  latter 
relieved  Buell  at  Louisville  October  3Oth.  Buell  retired  to 
Indianapolis  to  await  orders.  He  was  never  again  assigned  to 
active  duty,  though  he  held  his  Major-General's  commission 
until  May  23,  1864.  He  was  not  without  talent,  and  possessed 
much  technical  military  learning;  was  a  good  organizer  and 
disciplinarian,  but  was  better  qualified  for  an  adjutant's  office 
than  a  command  in  the  field.  Many  things  said  of  him  were 
untrue  or  unjust,  yet  the  fact  remains  that  he  failed  as  an  in 
dependent  commander  of  an  army  during  field  operations. 
With  great  opportunities,  he  did  not  achieve  success — the  only 
test  of  greatness  in  war — possibly  in  any  situation  in  life.  He 
was  not,  however,  the  least  of  a  class  developed  and  brought 
to  the  front  by  the  exigencies  of  the  war,  who  were  not  equal 

1  War  Records,  vol.  xvi.,  Part.  I.,  p.  1088. 
*  Ibid.    Part  II.,  pp.  641,  654. 


308  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

to  the  work  assigned  them,  or  who  could  not  or  did  not  avail 
themselves  of  the  opportunities  presented. 

Rosecrans,  while  in  command  of  the  Army  of  the  Cumber 
land,  won  the  battle  of  Stone's  River  (December  31,  1862); 
then  pushed  Bragg  across  the  Tennessee  and  fought  the  great 
battle  of  Chickamauga,  September  19  and  20,  1863.  He  was 
relieved  at  Chattanooga  by  Thomas,  October  19,  1863,  and 
was  assigned  to  the  Department  of  Missouri,  January  28,  1864. 
In  this  new  field  Rosecrans  displayed  much  activity  and  per 
formed  good  service,  but  he  was  relieved  again,  December  9, 
1864,  and  thereafter  was  on  waiting  orders  at  Cincinnati.  Not 
withstanding  some  mistakes,  his  character  as  a  great  soldier 
and  commanding  general  will  stand  the  severe  scrutiny  of 
military  critics.  He  was  a  man  of  many  attainments,  a  fine 
conversationalist,  and  a  genial  gentleman  who  drew  to  him 
many  devoted  friends. 

This  chapter,  already  of  greater  length  than  was  originally 
designed,  must  here  end,  as  I  must  turn  to  other  campaigns, 
armies,  and  fields  of  battle  more  nearly  connected  with  my 
further  career  in  the  War  of  the  Rebellion. 


BREVET    BRIGADIER-GENERAL   WM.   H.   BALL. 
(From  a  photograph   taken  1864.) 


CHAPTER  IX 

COMMISSIONED  COLONEL  OF  THE  IIOTH  OHIO  VOLUNTEERS 
—CAMPAIGNS  IN  WEST  VIRGINIA  UNDER  GENERAL  MIL- 
ROY,  1862-3 — EMANCIPATION  OF  SLAVES  IN  THE  SHEN- 
ANDOAH  VALLEY,  AND  INCIDENTS 

ON  September  30,  1862,  I  arrived  at  Columbus,  Ohio, 
from  Louisville,  and  was  at  once  commissioned  Colonel 
of  the  iioth  Ohio  Volunteer  Infantry.  My  regiment 
was  at  Camp  Piqua,  Ohio,  not  yet  organized  and  without  arms 
or  clothing.  I  found  the  camp  in  command  of  a  militia  colo 
nel,  appointed  for  the  purpose. 

The  men  of  the  i  loth  Ohio  were  for  the  most  part  recruited 
from  the  country,  and  were  being  fed  in  camp,  in  large  part, 
by  home-food  voluntarily  furnished  by  their  friends.  They 
were  a  fine  body  of  young  men,  but  none  of  the  officers  had 
seen  military  service. 

I  declined  to  assume  command  of  the  camp  or  regiment 
until  clothing  and  arms  could  be  procured.  Three  or  four 
days  sufficed  to  obtain  these  supplies,  but  only  percussion-cap 
smooth-bore  .69  calibre  muskets  could  be  obtained.  These 
guns  were  heavy,  long,  and  unwieldy,  and  much  inferior  to 
the  Springfield  .58  calibre  rifle,  but  I  accepted  them  tempo 
rarily  rather  than  be  delayed  in  the  drill  and  discipline  of  the 
regiment,  which  were  impossible  without  them. 

On  assuming  command,  I  called  the  officers  of  the  regiment 
together  and  explained  to  them  their  duties  as  well  as  my 
own,  and  especially  informed  each  company  commander  that 
he  would  be  required  to  qualify  himself  to  command  his 

309 


310  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

company,  and  that  at  all  times  he  would  be  held  responsible  for 
its  soldierly  conduct.  A  school  of  officers  was  established,  and 
the  whole  camp  soon  wore  a  military  aspect.  The  work  thus 
commenced  in  time  transformed  these  raw  volunteers  into 
officers  and  soldiers  as  good  as  ever  fought  in  any  war  or 
country.1 

The  environments  of  Camp  Piqua  were  not  favorable  to  dis 
cipline,  but  on  October  19,  1862,  the  regiment  took  cars  and 
proceeded  via  Columbus  to  Zanesville,  thence  by  water  to 
Marietta,  and  from  the  latter  place  on  foot  to  Parkersburg, 
West  Virginia,  where  it  first  occupied  and  camped  in  what  was 
called  the  enemy's  country.  An  early  but  severe  snow-storm 
came  during  the  first  night  of  our  encampment,  and  suggested 
the  hardship  and  suffering  which  were  not  to  cease  until  the 
final  victory  at  Appomattox.  Drill  and  discipline  went  on 
satisfactorily.  New  troops  will  bravely  stand  to  their  work  in 
battle  if  they  can  be  manoeuvred  successfully,  and  also  know 
how  to  use  their  arms.  General  J.  D.  Cox,  in  command  of 
the  District  of  West  Virginia,  with  his  uniform  courtesy  wel 
comed  me  by  telegraph  to  my  new  field  of  operations.  In  a 
few  days  I  was  ordered  to  Clarksburg  and  to  a  section  familiar 
to  me  when  serving  under  McClellan. 

At  Parkersburg  I  first  met  the  I22d  Ohio  Infantry,  com 
manded  by  Colonel  Wm.  H.  Ball.  He  was  my  junior  in  date 
of  muster  eight  days  and,  consequently,  in  the  more  than  two 
years  our  regiments  served  together,  I  generally  commanded 
him.  He  was  not  an  educated  soldier,  and  did  not  aspire  to 
become  one,  nor  did  he  take  pains  to  appear  well  on  drill  or 
on  parade,  yet  he  was  a  most  valuable  officer,  loyal  and  intel 
ligently  brave,  possessing  enough  mental  capacity  to  success 
fully  fill  any  position.  He  did  not  aspire  to  high  command, 
but  at  all  times  faithfully  performed  his  duty  in  camp  and  on 
the  battle-field.  His  loyalty  to  me,  while  my  senior  in  years, 
still  claims  my  gratitude. 

His  regiment,  like  the  volunteer  regiments  generally,  had  in 
it  many  men  who  became  prominent  in  the  war,  and,  still 

1  For  special  mention  of  officers  of  this  regiment,  see  Appendix  B. 


Author  a  Colonel — Again  in  West  Virginia  311 

later,  in  peace.  Lieutenant-Colonel  Moses  M.  Granger  was  a 
most  accomplished  officer,  and  deserved  a  higher  rank.  In 
addition  to  the  distinction  won  by  him  as  a  soldier  he  has 
attained  a  high  reputation  as  a  citizen,  lawyer,  and  jurist. 

The  first  surgeon  (Thaddeus  A.  Reamy)  of  the  I22d,  though 
not  long  in  the  field,  has  taken  a  first  place  in  his  profession, 
as  has  also  its  next  surgeon,  Wm.  M.  Houston,  and  its 
assistant  surgeon,  Wilson  G.  Bryant.  Its  chaplain,  Charles 
C.  McCabe,  was  one  of  the  best  and  most  efficient  in  the  war. 
His  zeal  in  the  performance,  under  all  circumstances,  of  the 
high  duties  of  his  office,  and  his  cheerful  disposition,  aided  in 
trying  times  to  keep  up  the  spirits  and  courage  of  the  soldiers. 
He  ministered  to  the  wounded  and  the  dying  on  the  battle 
field  and  to  the  sick  and  disabled  in  hospital.  He  was  famed 
throughout  the  armies  he  served  with  for  singing  at  appro 
priate  times,  with  a  strong,  melodious  voice,  patriotic  and  re 
ligious  songs,  in  which,  often  even  on  the  march,  a  large  part 
of  the  army  would  join. 

He  has  since  achieved  success  in  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church,  in  which  he  is  now  a  bishop.  William  T.  Meloy,  D.D., 
of  the  United  Presbyterian  Church — now  in  Chicago — was  a 
lieutenant  in  this  regiment.  He  has  become  eminent  for  his 
learning  and  high  character.  Those  named  of  these  companion 
regiments  are  examples  only  of  others  who  voluntarily  and 
heroically  endured  the  trying  ordeal  of  war. 

A  false  report  that  Stonewall  Jackson  was  threatening  a  raid 
on  the  Baltimore  and  Ohio  Railroad  at  New  Creek  (now  Key- 
ser),  West  Virginia,  caused  a  precipitate  transfer  by  rail  of  my 
command  to  that  place.  There  I  came  first  under  the  direct 
command  of  Major-General  Robert  H.  Milroy,  then  distin 
guished  for  his  zeal  for  the  Union  and  for  personal  bravery. 
He  was  tall  and  of  commanding  presence.  His  head  of  white, 
shocky,  stiff  hair  led  his  soldiers  to  dub  him  the  ' '  Gray  Eagle. ' ' 
He  had  much  military  learning,  and  had  fought  in  many  of  the 
bloodiest  battles  of  the  war,  notably  at  the  second  Bull  Run 
under  Pope.  He  had  seen  service  also  in  the  Mexican  War. 
Notwithstanding  his  excessive  impetuosity,  he  was  a  just, 


312  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

generous,  kind-hearted  man,  and  possessed  the  confidence  of 
his  troops  to  a  high  degree.  He  incurred  the  ill-will  of  Secre 
tary  of  War  Stanton,  and,  regarding  himself  as  unjustly  treated, 
more  than  reciprocated  the  Secretary's  dislike.  He  ardently 
admired  President  Lincoln,  and  only  criticised  him  for  delay 
in  emancipating  the  slaves.  He  believed  the  slaves  of  those 
in  rebellion  should  have  been  given  their  freedom  from  the  be 
ginning  of  the  war.  He  was  so  bitterly  hostile  to  slavery  and 
to  individual  Secessionists,  and  so  radical  in  his  methods,  that 
Jefferson  Davis,  by  proclamation,  excepted  him  and  his  officers 
from  being  treated,  if  captured,  as  prisoners  of  war.  He  was 
charged  with  making  assessments  on  inhabitants  and  of  requir 
ing  them  to  take  an  oath  to  support  the  Constitution  and  the 
Union.  He  also  had  the  distinction  of  being  mentioned  by 
Davis  in  a  Message  to  the  Confederate  Congress,  January  12, 
1863.  There  was  much  correspondence  between  the  opposing 
authorities  on  the  subject  of  his  mode  of  conducting  the  war,1 
and  it  seems  General  Halleck  disavowed  and  condemned  Mil- 
roy's  alleged  acts.  Much  charged  against  Milroy  was  false, 
though  it  is  true  he  believed  in  prosecuting  the  war  with  an 
iron  hand.  He  regarded  the  Confederate  soldier  in  the  field 
with  more  favor  than  the  Confederate  stay-at-home  who  acted 
as  a  spy,  or  who,  as  a  guerrilla,  engaged  in  shooting  from 
ambush  passing  soldiers  or  teamsters  and  cutting  telegraph 
wires.  He  did  require  certain  influential  persons  who  resided 
within  his  lines  to  take  an  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  United 
States  and  to  West  Virginia  or  to  forfeit  all  right  to  the  pro 
tection  of  his  division.  Further  than  this  he  did  not  go. 

At  New  Creek  I  first  met  G.  P.  Cluseret,  a  French  soldier 
of  fortune,  but  recently  appointed  a  Brigadier-General.  He 
held  a  command  under  Milroy  in  the  Cheat  Mountain  Division. 
He  assumed  much  military  and  other  learning,  was  imperious 
and  overbearing  by  nature,  spoke  English  imperfectly,  and 
did  not  seem  to  desire  to  get  in  touch  with  volunteers.  With 
him  I  had  my  only  personal  difficulty  of  a  serious  nature 
during  the  war. 

1  War  Records,  vol.  xxi.,  p.  1054. 


WILLIAM    T.    MELOV,   D.D., 

LIEUTENANT    122D    OHIO    VOLUNTEERS. 

(From  a  photogtaph  tak^n  1896.') 


General  Milroy — Cluseret  incident        313 

At  New  Creek  a  constant  drill  was  kept  up.  To  avoid  sur 
prises  by  sudden  dashes,  the  companies  as  well  as  the  battalion 
were  taught  to  form  squares  quickly  and  to  guard  against 
cavalry.  Early  in  December  Milroy  marched  to  Little  Peters 
burg,  on  the  South  Branch  of  the  Potomac,  and  I  was  assigned 
to  command  a  post  at  Moorefield  to  include  Hardy  County, 
West  Virginia,  Milroy's  headquarters  being  ten  miles  distant. 
General  Lee  ordered  General  W.  E.  Jones,  then  temporarily 
in  command  in  the  Shenandoah  Valley,  to  retake  the  country 
we  occupied.  A  feeble  effort  to  do  this  failed.  We  were  kept 
constantly  on  the  alert,  however,  by  annoying  attacks  of  Cap 
tain  McNeil's  irregular  cavalry  or  guerrillas.  Late  in  De 
cember,  1862,  it  was  decided  to  make  a  raid  into  the  lower 
Shenandoah  Valley  and,  if  found  practicable,  occupy  it  per 
manently.  I  was  designated  to  lead  the  raid  with  about  two 
thousand  infantry,  cavalry,  and  artillery.  This  made  it  neces 
sary  for  me  to  be  relieved  of  the  command  of  the  post. 
Cluseret  was  therefore  ordered  from  Petersburg  to  relieve  me. 
He  arrived  late  in  the  evening  with  his  staff  and  escort,  showed 
his  orders,  and  I  suggested  that  he  assume  the  command  at 
once.  This  he  declined  to  do  until  he  ascertained  the  position 
of  the  troops,  roads,  etc.  I  provided  him  comfortable  quarters, 
and  everything  would  have  gone  along  pleasantly  but  for  an 
unexpected  incident. 

Before  Cluseret's  arrival,  a  lieutenant-colonel  of  a  West 
Virginia  regiment  applied  for  leave  to  go  to  Petersburg  to  visit 
a  lady  friend.  This  I  refused,  and  he  undertook  to  go  without 
leave.  After  he  had  proceeded  along  the  river  road  by  moon 
light  about  three  miles,  he  was  halted  by  a  man  who,  from  be 
hind  a  tree,  pointed  a  musket  at  him  and  demanded  his 
surrender  and  that  he  deliver  up  his  sword,  pistols,  overcoat, 
horse,  and  trappings,  all  of  which  he  did  promptly,  and  ac 
cepted  a  parole.  The  man  who  made  the  capture  claimed  to 
be  a  regular  Confederate  soldier  returning  from  a  furlough  to 
his  command.  With  the  colonel's  property  and  on  the  horse 
he  proceeded  by  a  mountain  path  on  his  journey.  The  colonel 
walked  back  to  Moorefield  and  related  his  adventure.  I  at 


314  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

once  ordered  Captain  Rowan  with  a  small  number  of  his  West 
Virginia  cavalry  to  pursue  the  Confederate.  As  there  was 
snow  on  the  ground,  his  pursuit  was  easy,  and  before  midnight 
the  Captain  had  captured  him  and  all  the  colonel's  property 
and  returned  to  Moorefield.  When  the  man  was  brought  be 
fore  me,  I  made  some  examination  of  him  and  then  ordered 
him  taken  to  the  guard-house.  At  this  time  Cluseret  appeared 
on  the  scene,  and  in  an  excited  way  demanded  that  I  should 
order  the  prisoner  shot  forthwith.  This  being  declined,  he 
again  produced  his  order  to  supersede  me,  and  declared  he 
would  at  once  take  command  and  himself  order  the  man  shot 
that  night.  I  could  not  deny  his  right  to  assume  command 
notwithstanding  what  had  taken  place,  but  I  strongly  denied 
his  authority  to  shoot  the  captive,  and  insisted  that  there  was 
no  cause  for  shooting  him  summarily ;  that  only  through  a 
court-martial  or  military  commission  could  he  be  condemned, 
and  a  sentence  to  death  would,  to  carry  it  out,  require  the  ap 
proval  of  the  President.  (It  was  not  until  later  in  the  war  that 
department,  district,  or  army  commanders  could  approve  a 
capital  sentence.)  Cluseret  vehemently  denounced  the  authori 
ties,  including  the  President,  for  their  mild  way  of  carrying  on 
the  war,  and  talked  himself  into  a  frenzy.  As  he  was  prepar 
ing  an  order  to  require  the  Provost -Marshal  to  shoot  the  man 
without  trial,  I  repaired  to  the  telegraph  office  and  made  Mil- 
roy  acquainted  with  the  situation,  whereupon  he  ordered  me 
to  retain  command  of  the  post  until  further  orders.  Milroy, 
on  coming  to  Moorefield  the  next  day,  sustained  me,  and  the 
soldier  was  treated  as  an  ordinary  prisoner  of  war.  Cluseret 
pretended  to  be  satisfied,  and  later  succeeded  in  getting  him 
self  assigned  to  command  the  expedition  to  the  Shenandoah 
Valley — not  a  very  desirable  one  in  mid-winter.  He  reached 
Strasburg,  and  moved  through  the  Valley  northward  to  Win 
chester,  but  was  pursued  by  a  small  force  under  Jones.  This 
made  it  necessary  to  reinforce  him,  and  I  started  under  orders 
for  that  place  via  Romney  and  Blue's  Gap,  and  was  joined  on 
the  way  by  Milroy  with  the  body  of  his  division.  On  leaving 
Moorefield,  on  the  3<Dth  of  December,  I  with  two  orderlies  rode 


General  Milroy — Cluseret  incident        3r5 

ahead  about  a  mile  to  the  South  Branch  of  the  Potomac  to 
examine  the  ford,  as  we  had  no  pontoons,  and,  having  crossed 
the  river,  awaited  the  approach  of  the  wagon  train  and  its 
guard,  which  was  to  take  the  advance,  as  no  enemy  was  known 
to  be  in  that  direction.  As  the  head  of  the  train  reached  the 
ford  Captain  J.  H.  McNeil  (whose  home  was  near  by),  with 
about  fifty  of  his  guerrilla  band,  attacked  it  by  emerging  from 
ambush  on  the  Moorefield  side  of  the  river.  A  short  fight 
ensued,  during  which  I  recrossed  the  river  and  joined  in  it. 
McNeil  was  driven  off  with  little  loss,  but  for  a  brief  time  I 
was  in  much  danger  of  capture,  at  least. 

On  this  day  a  colored  boy,  an  escaped  slave,  whom  we 
named  Andrew  Jackson,  joined  me.  He  became  my  servant 
to  the  end  of  the  war.  He  was  always  faithful,  honest,  good- 
natured,  and  brave.  He  was  a  full-blood  African,  and  during" 
a  battle  would  voluntarily  take  a  soldier's  arms  and  fight  with 
the  advance  line.  He  became  widely  known  throughout  the 
Army  of  the  Potomac  and  other  armies  in  which  I  served,  and 
was  kindly  treated  and  welcomed  wherever  he  went.  He  re 
sided  after  the  war  in  Springfield,  Ohio,  and  died  there  (1895) 
of  an  injury  resulting  from  the  kick  of  a  horse. 

On  the  night  of  December  31, 1862, the  command  bivouacked 
on  the  western  slope  of  the  Alleghany  Mountains  in  a  fierce 
snow-storm,  and  early  the  next  morning  my  troops  led  the  way 
in  the  continuing  storm  over  the  summit.  Shortly  after  the 
head  of  the  column  commenced  the  eastern  descent,  and  when 
the  chilling  winter  blasts  had  caused  the  lowest  ebb  of  human 
enthusiasm  to  be  reached,  shouts  were  heard  by  me,  at  first 
indistinctly,  then  nearer  and  louder.  This  was  so  unusual  and 
unexpected  under  the  depressing  circumstances  that  I  ordered 
the  column  to  halt  until  I  could  go  back  and  ascertain  the 
cause.  My  first"  impression  was  that  a  sudden  attack  had  been 
made  on  the  rear  of  the  troops,  but  as  the  shouts  came  nearer 
I  took  them  to  be  for  a  great  victory,  news  of  which  had  just 
arrived.  When  I  reached  the  crest  of  the  mountain  I  descried, 
through  the  flying  snow,  General  Milroy  riding  along  the  line 
of  troops  and  halting  at  intervals  as  though  to  briefly  address 


316  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

the  men.  I  awaited  his  approach,  and  on  his  arrival  accosted 
him  with  the  inquiry,  "  What  is  the  matter,  General  ?  "  He 
had  his  hat  and  sword  in  his  right  hand,  and  with  the  other 
guided  his  horse  at  a  reckless  gallop  through  the  snow,  his  tall 
form,  shocky  white  hair  fluttering  in  the  storm,  and  evident 
agitation  making  a  figure  most  picturesque  and  striking.  He 
pulled  up  his  horse  abruptly  to  answer  my  question.  A 
natural  impediment  in  his  speech,  affecting  him  most  when 
excited,  caused  some  delay  in  his  first  vehement  utterance. 
He  said : 

"  Colonel,  don  t  you  know  that  this  is  Emancipation  Day,  when  all 
slaves  will  be  made  free  ?  ' ' 

He  then  turned  to  the  halted  troops  and  again  broke  forth : 

"  This  day  President  Lincoln  will  proclaim  the  freedom  of  four  mil 
lions  of  human  slaves,  the  most  important  event  in  the  history  of  the 
world  since  Christ  was  born.  Our  boast  that  this  is  a  land  of  liberty 
has  been  a  flaunting  lie.  Henceforth  it  will  be  a  veritable  reality. 
The  defeats  of  our  armies  in  the  past  we  have  deserved,  because  we 
waged  a  war  to  protect  and  perpetuate  and  to  rivet  firmer  the  chains  of 
slavery.  Hereafter  we  shall  prosecute  the  war  to  establish  and  perpet 
uate  liberty  for  all  mankind  beneath  the  flag  j  and  the  Lord  God  Al 
mighty  will  fight  on  our  side,  and  he  is  a  host,  and  the  Union  armies 
will  triumph." 

This  is  the  character  of  speech  that  aroused  the  soldiers  to 
voiceful  demonstrations  on  a  summit  of  the  Apalachian  chain 
on  this  cold  and  stormy  mid-winter  morning.  The  sequel 
shows  how  Milroy's  prophecy  was  fulfilled;  but  not  always 
did  victory  come  to  the  Union  arms.  As  in  the  days  of  the 
Crusades,  when  the  Lord  was  supposed  to  battle  on  the  side 
of  the  Crusaders,  victory  was  not  uniformly  with  them. 
Charles  Martel,  believing  in  prayer  for  divine  aid  on  going 
into  battle,  yet  testified  that  the  "  Lord  always  fights  on  the 
side  of  the  heaviest  battalions  "  ;  which  was  only  another  way 
of  saying,  "  The  Lord  helps  those  who  help  themselves." 


Shenandoah  Valley — Emancipation        317 

Milroy's  command  debouched  into  the  Valley  of  the  Shen 
andoah,  already  memorable  for  its  many  bloody  conflicts,  and 
destined  to  become  yet  more  memorable  by  reason  of  still 
other  and  far  bloodier  battles. 

This  war-stricken  valley,  from  Staunton  to  the  Potomac, 
was  beautiful  and  rich,  and  its  inhabitants  were,  prior  to  the 
war,  proud  and  boastful ;  they  possessed  many  slaves  to  till 
the  soil  and  for  personal  servants.  It  was  also  a  breeding- 
ground  for  slaves  which,  in  a  more  southern  market,  brought 
great  profit  to  their  owners.  Winchester  was  the  home  of  the 
Masons  and  others,  distinguished  as  statesmen  and  soldiers 
through  all  the  history  of  Virginia. 

But  not  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  Shenandoah  Valley  were 
disloyal.  A  majority  of  its  voting  population  was,  before  the 
war  actually  commenced,  in  favor  of  the  Union,  and  its  Repre 
sentatives  voted  against  an  Ordinance  of  Secession.  I  have 
seen  an  address  of  Philip  Williams,  Esq.,  an  old,  respected, 
and  distinguished  lawyer  of  Winchester,  made  when  the  ques 
tion  of  Secession  was  pending,  in  which  he  attempted  to  depict 
the  horrors  of  the  war  that  would  follow  an  attempt  to  set  up 
an  independent  government.  He  prophesied  that  the  valley 
would  be  a  battle-ground  for  the  contending  hosts;  that  the 
fields  would  be  overrun,  the  crops  destroyed,  grain  and  stock 
confiscated ;  and  the  slaves  carried  off  and  set  free.  His  ad 
dress  brought  him  for  a  time  into  ridicule.  He  lived  to  see 
his  word-picture  appear  as  only  a  vain,  faint  representation  of 
the  reality.  When  the  war  came,  and  his  sons  and  friends 
joined  the  Confederate  Army,  his  sympathies  were  with  the 
South.  He  often  recurred,  however,  to  his  more  than  fulfilled 
prophecy.  He  lived  to  see  the  valley  for  ninety  or  more  miles 
of  its  length  reek  with  blood  ;  the  houses,  whether  in  city  or 
village,  turned  into  hospitals,  and  the  war-lit  fires  of  burning 
mills,  barns,  and  grain  stacks  illuminate  the  valley  and  the 
mountain  slopes  to  the  summits  of  the  Blue  Ridge  and  the 
Alleghanies  on  its  east  and  west.  Pen  cannot  adequately  de 
scribe  the  hell  of  agony,  desolation,  and  despair  witnessed  in 
this  fertile  region  in  the  four  years  of  war;  and  long  before  the 


Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

conflict  ended  not  a  human  slave  was  held  therein.  It,  how 
ever,  has  long  since,  under  a  new  civilization,  recovered  its 
wonted  prosperity,  and  no  inhabitant  thereof,  though  many 
are  the  sons  and  daughters  of  slaveholders,  desires  to  again 
hold  slaves.  Not  all  the  affluent  ante-bellum  inhabitants  of 
this  valley  owned  slaves  or  believed  in  slavery.  Many  were 
Quakers,  others  Dunkards  (or  Tunkers),  all  of  whom  were,  by 
religious  training  and  conviction,  opposed  to  human  slavery, 
hence  opposed  to  Secession  and  a  slave  power.  Some  of  the 
younger  men  of  Quaker  or  Dunkard  families  through  compul 
sion  joined  the  Confederate  Army,  but  the  number  was  small. 
Though  opposed  to  war,  no  more  loyal  Union  people  could 
be  found  anywhere.  Their  Secession  neighbors  called  them 
"  Tories,"  and  the  Quakers  descendants  of  Tories  of  the  Revo 
lution.  It  was  common  to  hear  related  the  story  of  the  im 
prisonment  at  Winchester,  under  General  Washington's  order, 
of  certain  Quakers  of  Philadelphia,  claimed  to  have  been 
Tories,  who  were  given  a  twenty-mile  prison-bound  limit,  and 
who,  when  peace  came,  coveting  the  rich  lands  of  the  valley, 
and  being  humiliated  over  their  imprisonment,  sent  for  their 
families  and  settled  there  permanently.  Whether  or  not  this 
story  gives  the  true  reason  for  the  early  settlement  of  Quakers 
in  Virginia,  certain  it  is  that  they  were  loyal  to  the  Union  that 
Washington  helped  to  found  and  opposed  to  human  bondage. 
Milroy's  enthusiasm  over  Emancipation  was  put  in  practice 
when  he  entered  Winchester.  Without  seeing  the  Proclama 
tion  of  the  President,  and  without  knowing  certainly  it  was 
issued  and  made  applicable  to  the  Shenandoah  Valley  district, 
Milroy  issued  a  proclamation  headed,  "  FREEDOM  TO  SLAVES." 
This  had  the  effect  of  causing  those  within  the  lines  of  his  com 
mand  at  once  to  leave  their  masters.  Though  the  slaves  could 
not  read,  not  one  failed  during  the  succeeding  night  to  hear 
that  liberty  had  been  proclaimed,  and  all,  even  to  the  most 
trusted  and  faithful  personal  or  house  servant,  regardless  of 
age,  sex,  or  previous  kind  treatment,  so  far  as  known,  asserted 
their  freedom.  In  some  way  it  had  been  inculcated  into  the 
minds  of  these  people  that  if  they,  by  word  or  act,  however 


MAP   OF   SHENANDOAH    VALLEY. 
{From  Major  W.  f.  Tiemann's  "  History  of  the  isyth  New  York") 


Shenandoah  Valley — Emancipation        319 

simple  or  unimportant  it  might  be,  after  the  Proclamation 
acquiesced  in  their  previous  condition  they  would  again  for 
life  become  slaves.  They  probably  derived  this  notion  from 
the  Bible  story  of  Hebrew  slavery,  wherein  it  is  said  that  after 
six  years'  service  the  slave  should  become  free,  save  when, 
preferring  slavery,  he  voluntarily  permitted  his  former  master 
to  bore  his  ears  with  an  awl  at  the  door-post  and  thus  conse 
crate  himself  to  slavery  forever.1 

So  it  turned  out  that  many  aristocratic  matrons  and  maidens, 
reared  in  luxury  and  accustomed  to  the  personal  service  of 
servants,  had  to  cook  their  own  breakfasts  or  go  hungry,  as  no 
amount  of  persuasion,  kind  treatment,  or  promises  would  in 
duce  the  former  slave  to  do  the  least  act  that  by  possibility 
might  be  construed  to  be  an  acquiescence  in  a  previous  condi 
tion  of  servitude.  Even  the  assurance  of  a  Union  officer  could 
not  shake  their  position.  The  "  Year  of  Jubilee,"  of  which 
they  had  sung  in  their  hearts,  had  been  long  coming  for  them, 
and  there  was  no  use  for  awls  and  door-posts  for  their  ears, 
nor  were  they  going  to  take  chances.  Many  of  them,  though 
offered  food  for  their  own  use  by  their  masters,  would  not 
cook  it,  lest  it  might  be  construed  as  a  recognition  of  a  mas 
ter's  continuing  authority  over  them.  Most  of  them  gathered 
up  their  little  property  with  marvellous  dispatch  and  presented 
themselves  ready  to  emigrate.  General  Milroy  used  the  other 
wise  empty  trains  going  north  for  supplies  to  carry  these  freed 
people  from  the  land  of  their  birth  to  where  a  slave  condition 
could  not  overtake  them.  Most  of  them  knew  the  story  of  John 
Brown,  and  many  of  them  had,  in  some  way,  been  supplied 
with  cheap  wood-cut  pictures  of  this  early  champion  of  their 
liberty.  In  some  way  they  had  learned  also  to  sing  songs  of 
John  Brown,  and  other  songs  of  liberty.  When  the  trains  pro 
ceeded  towards  the  Potomac  freighted  with  these  people  they 
commingled  songs  of  freedom  and  the  religious  hymns  peculiar 
to  their  race  with  the  universal  but  more  cheerful  music  of  the 
fiddle  and  banjo. 

They   were    light  -  hearted    and    free    from    care,    though 

1  Ex.  xxi.,  6  ;  Deut.  xv.,  17. 


320  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

abandoning  all  of  home  they  had  ever  known,  and  going 
whither,  for  home  and  protection,  they  knew  not, — all  was 
compensated  for  with  them,  if  only  they  were  forever  free. 
The  prompt  emancipation  of  slaves  was  exceptional  in  the 
Shenandoah  Valley,  especially  at  Winchester.  Most  of  these 
freed  people  soon  found  homes  and  employment,  some  of  the 
younger  men  with  the  army,  later  as  soldiers,  and  others  on 
farms,  or  as  house  servants  North,  where  the  war  had  called 
away  the  able-bodied  men.  It  was  not  until  after  the  war  that 
the  great  trials  of  the  freedmen  came. 

It  must  not  be  assumed  that  the  slave  owners  in  the  Valley 
were,  in  war  times  at  least,  cruel  to  their  slaves;  on  the  con 
trary,  kindness  and  indulgence  were  the  rule.  This  was  prob 
ably  true  in  ante-war  days,  save  when  members  of  families  were 
sold  and  separated  to  be  transported  to  distant  parts.  I  recall 
no  word  of  censure  to  the  blacks  for  accepting  freedom.  Pity 
was  in  some  cases  expressed.  Tokens  of  remembrance  were 
offered  and  accepted  with  emotion.  Those  who  had  been 
house  or  personal  servants  often  evinced  feelings  of  compas 
sion  for  the  pitiable  and  helpless  condition  of  those  whom  they 
had  so  long  served.  It  must  be  remembered  that,  regardless 
of  estates  once  owned,  the  war  had  impoverished  the  people 
of  this  Valley,  and  but  few  of  them  could,  even  with  money, 
secure  enough  food,  clothing,  and  help  to  enable  them  to  live 
in  anything  approaching  comfort.  And  the  future  then  had 
no  promise  of  relief. 

The  plight  of  some  of  the  affluent  people  might  well  excite 
sympathy.  I  remember  an  excellent  Winchester  family  of 
four  ladies,  a  mother  and  three  grown  daughters,  who  were 
educated  and  accomplished,  unused  to  work,  and  thus  far 
wholly  dependent  on  their  slaves.  White  or  black  servants 
could  not,  after  the  Proclamation,  be  procured  for  money. 
These  ladies  therefore  held  a  consultation  to  determine  what 
could  be  done.  The  mother  would  not  attempt  to  do  what 
she  deemed  menial  service.  The  daughters  at  length  decided 
to  work  "  week  about,"  and  in  this  way  each  could  be  a  lady 
two  weeks  out  of  three.  This  plan  seemed  to  operate  well, 


Shenandoah  Valley — Emancipation       321 

and  they  soon  became  quite  cheerful  over  it,  and  boastful  of 
domestic  accomplishments. 

Cluseret  while  on  his  raid  into  the  Valley  brooded  over  the 
incident  which  resulted  in  his  being  prevented  from  taking 
command  of  the  post  at  Moorefield,  and  pretended  to  believe 
that  I  had  wronged  him.  He  went  so  far  as  to  talk  freely  to 
officers  about  the  incident,  and  to  declare  that  if  he  should 
meet  me  again  he  would  shoot  me  unless  I  made  amends. 
These  threats  came  to  me  on  my  arrival  at  Winchester,  and 
my  friends  seemed  to  apprehend  serious  consequences.  As  I 
always  deprecated  personal  conflicts,  and  was  careful  to  avoid 
them,  I  was  somewhat  annoyed.  I  knew  little  of  Cluseret  or 
his  character,  except  that  he  was  an  adventurer  or  soldier  of 
fortune.  I  announced  nothing  as  to  what  I  should  do  if  he 
attempted  to  assault  me,  but  I  took  pains  to  carry  a  revolver 
with  which  I  purposed,  if  attacked,  to  kill  him  if  possible  be 
fore  I  received  any  serious  injury.  I  soon  met,  saluted,  and 
passed  him  without  receiving  any  recognition  in  return  except 
a  fierce,  vicious  stare.  After  this,  on  several  occasions,  I 
passed  him  about  the  camps  or  on  the  roads  without  noticing 
him,  and  although  his  threats  were  repeated  I  was  not  molested 
by  him.  Soon  the  incident  and  his  subsequent  conduct  led  to 
some  trouble  between  him  and  Milroy.  Milroy  placed  him  in 
arrest,  and  he  was  later  ordered  from  the  command.  On 
March  2,  1863,  he  was  permitted  to  resign,  having  served  as  a 
Brigadier-General  of  Volunteers  from  October  n,  1862,  and 
having  previously,  from  March  10,  1862,  been  a  Colonel  and 
acting  aide-de-camp.  He  repaired  to  New  York,  and  there  did 
some  newspaper  work  in  which  he  assailed  President  Lincoln 
and  the  conduct  of  the  war,  and  subsequently  disappeared. 
Afterwards  he  became  the  Secretary  of  War  of  the  Commune 
in  Paris,  near  the  close  of  the  Franco-Prussian  War.  He  es 
caped  from  Paris  at  its  close,  and  years  later,  being  pardoned, 
he  returned  to  France,  and  is  now,  I  am  informed,  a  Socialist 
member  of  the  Chamber  of  Deputies. 

There  were  many  such  adventurers  as  Cluseret  from  foreign 
countries  who  received  commissions  in  our  volunteer  army  on 


VOL.  I.— 21. 


322  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

account  of  their  supposed  military  knowledge  or  experience, 
who  almost  without  exception  proved  failures  or  worse.  They 
were  generally  domineering,  and  of  a  temperament  not  suited 
to  command  the  American  volunteer  soldier.  They  had,  in 
fact,  no  affinity  with  him,  and  did  not  gain  his  confidence. 
This  was  not  true,  however,  of  General  John  B.  Turchin,  the 
Russian,  and  perhaps  a  very  few  others. 

Milroy's  command  during  the  winter  was  chiefly  engaged  in 
holding  the  Valley  and  in  protecting  the  Baltimore  and  Ohio 
Railroad  from  the  raids  of  small  bodies  of  Confederates.  In 
this  it  was  successful.  We  were  now  in  the  Middle  Depart 
ment,  commanded  by  General  Robert  C.  Schenck,  whose 
headquarters  were  at  Baltimore.  Schenck  was  appointed  a 
Brigadier-General  of  Volunteers  May  17,  1861,  and  a  Major- 
General  August  30,  1862.  Prior  to  his  assignment  to  this  de 
partment  he  served  with  distinction  in  the  Eastern  army,  and 
was  elected  to  Congress  in  1862,  but  retained  his  commission 
until  Congress  met,  December  5,  1863.  Schenck,  though 
without  military  education  or  experience,  was  a  man  of  mili 
tary  instincts  and  possessed  many  of  the  high  qualities  of  a 
soldier.  He  was  a  trained  statesman,  lawyer,  and  thinker,  and 
an  earnest,  energetic,  forceful,  successful  man. 

For  the  most  part,  while  at  Winchester  I  commended  a 
brigade  composed  of  infantry  and  artillery,  located  on  the 
heights,  but  I  was  for  a  time  under  Brigadier-General  Wash 
ington  L.  Elliott,  a  regular  officer,  who  was  amiable  and  capable 
in  all  that  pertained  to  military  discipline,  but  timid  and  un 
enterprising.  He  performed  all  duty  faithfully  to  orders,  but 
little  further.  Milroy,  on  the  other  hand,  was  restless  and 
constantly  on  the  alert,  eager  to  achieve  all  it  was  possible  for 
his  command  to  accomplish,  hence  we  were  frequently  sent  on 
raids  up  the  Valley  to  Staunton,  Front  Royal,  and  through  the 
mountains.  Colonel  Mosby's  guerrillas  infested  the  country 
east  of  the  Valley,  and  frequently  dashed  into  it  through  the 
gaps  of  the  Blue  Ridge  and  attacked  our  supply  trains  and 
small  scouting  parties  and  pickets,  accomplishing  little  save  to 
keep  us  on  the  alert. 


s  f 

II 


4    it 


Shenandoah  Valley — Emancipation       323 

Imbodens  and  Jenkin's  cavalry  held  the  upper  valley  in  the 
neighborhood  of  Mount  Jackson  and  New  Market,  but  gener 
ally  retired  without  fighting  when  an  expedition  moved  against 
them.  As  we  were  in  the  enemy's  country,  our  movements 
were  generally  made  known  promptly  to  the  Confederates, 
and  our  expeditions  usually  proved  fruitless  of  substantial 
results.  I  led  a  force  of  about  one  thousand  men  in  January, 
1863,  to  Front  Royal,  then  held  by  a  small  cavalry  force  which 
I  hoped  to  surprise  and  capture,  but  I  succeeded  in  doing 
nothing  more  than  take  a  few  prisoners  and  drive  the  enemy 
from  the  place,  with  little  fighting.  We  took  Front  Royal 
late  in  the  evening  of  a  very  cold  night,  and  decided  to  hold  it 
until  the  next  day.  Not  being  sure  of  our  strength,  and  to 
avoid  a  surprise,  I  was  obliged  to  keep  my  men  on  duty  through 
out  the  night.  A  feeble  attack  only  was  made  on  us  at  daybreak. 

Illustrating  the  way  Union  officers  were  regarded  and  treated 
by  the  Secession  inhabitants,  I  recall  an  incident  which  oc 
curred  at  Front  Royal.  A  member  of  my  staff  arranged  for 
supper  at  the  house  of  Colonel  Bacon,  an  old  man  and  Seces 
sionist.  The  Colonel  treated  us  politely,  but  while  we  were 
eating  a  number  of  ladies  of  the  town  assembled  in  an  adjoin 
ing  parlor  in  which  there  was  a  piano,  threw  the  communicating 
door  open,  and  proceeded  to  sing  such  Confederate  war-songs 
as  Stone^vall  Jackson  's  Away  and  My  Maryland.  We  of  course 
accepted  good  humoredly  this  concert  for  our  benefit,  but 
when  we  had  finished  supper,  uninvited,  Chaplain  McCabe — 
now  Bishop  McCabe — and  I  stepped  into  the  parlor.  We  were 
not  even  offered  a  seat,  and  in  a  short  time  the  music  ceased 
and  the  lady  at  the  piano  left  it.  Chaplain  McCabe  at  once 
seated  himself  at  the  piano,  and,  to  the  amazement  of  the 
ladies,  commenced  singing,  with  his  extraordinarily  strong, 
sonorous  voice,  "  We  are  coming,  Father  Abraham,  three 
hundred  thousand  more."  The  ladies  stood  their  ground 
courageously  for  a  time,  but  while  the  Chaplain,  playing  his 
own  accompaniment,  was  singing  My  Maryland,  with  words 
descriptive  of  Lee's  invasion  of  and  retreat  from  Maryland, 
including  the  words,  "  And  they  left  Antietam  in  their  track, 


324  Campaigns  of  the  Civil  War 

in  their  track,"  the  ladies  threw  open  the  front  door  and  rushed 
precipitately  to  the  street  and  thence  to  their  homes.  It  was 
afterwards  said  that  we  were  ungallant  to  these  ladies. 

While  at  Winchester,  besides  the  usual  camp  duty  and  par 
ticipation  in  an  occasional  raid,  I  was  President  of  a  Military 
Commission  composed  of  three  officers,  with  an  officer  for 
recorder.  It  was  modelled  on  the  military  commission  first 
established,  I  believe,  by  General  Scott  in  Mexico  for  the  trial 
of  citizens  for  offences  not  punishable  under  the  Articles  of 
War.  There  was  a  necessity  for  some  authority  to  take  juris 
diction  of  common  law  crimes,  as  all  courts  in  the  valley  were 
suspended.  Besides  citizens  charged  with  such  crimes,  there 
were  referred  to  the  commission  for  trial  citizens  charged  with 
offences  against  the  Union  Army,  such  as  shooting  soldiers 
from  ambush,  etc.  The  constitutionality  of  the  commission 
was  questioned,  yet  it  tried  on  only  formal  charges  citizens 
charged  with  murder,  larceny,  burglary,  arson,  and  breaches 
of  the  peace.  Generally  its  findings  and  sentences  were  ap 
proved  by  the  War  Department  or  the  President,  even  when 
the  accused  was  sentenced  to  imprisonment  in  a  Northern 
penitentiary.  There  were  one  or  two  cases  where  the  accused 
were  sentenced  to  be  shot,  but  in  no  case  did  the  President 
allow  such  a  sentence  to  be  carried  out.  During  the  trial  for 
murder  of  an  old  man  by  the  name  of  Buffenbarger,  I  learned 
that  he  had,  at  Sharpsburg,  Maryland,  been  a  friend  of  my 
father  when  both  were  young  men.1  It  turned  out  that  Buf 
fenbarger  had  killed  a  young  and  powerful  man  who  had  as 
saulted  him  violently  without  good  cause.  A  majority  of  the 
commission  found  him  guilty  of  manslaughter,  and  the  com 
mission  gave  him  the  lightest  sentence — one  year  in  a  peni 
tentiary.  His  early  friendship  for  my  father  perhaps  caused 
me  to  find  grounds  on  which  to  favor  his  acquittal.  Counsel 
were  allowed  in  all  cases;  generally  Philip  Williams,  Esq.,  an 
old  and  distinguished  lawyer  of  Winchester,  represented  the 
accused,  and  Captain  Zebulon  Baird,  Judge-Advocate  on  Mil- 
roy's  staff  (an  able  Indiana  lawyer),  appeared  for  the  prosecution. 

1  My  father,  Joseph  Keifer,  was  born  at  Sharpsburg,  February  28,  1784. 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 


LOAN  DEPT. 


RENEWALS  ONLY— 

This  book  is  due  on  the  la 
on  the  date  to  v 
Renewed  books  are  sub 

RCCLyED, 

A  ri  n    —  v  -p           -J        '* 

-TEL.  NO.  642-3405 

st  date  stamped  below,  or 
vhich  renewed, 
ect  to  immedjagjcecalL 

FWT 

APft^j  '/q-iAft 

f--    i*  U 

LOAN  DEPT. 

AUG261991 

^o^oT^l-s,           u-S5ggB»i. 

p 


T— 


LD  21A-50m-8,'61 
(C1795slO)476B 


215568 


YC  58174 

U.C.  BERKELEY  LIBRARIES 


CD3S3315S1 


